TheStonerOne
Iron
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2025
- Posts
- 182
- Reputation
- 142
One of the (many) reasons why white supremacists why white supremacists exclude Ashkenazim from the oh so exclusive club of "whiteness" is due to their Middle Eastern ancestry. Ironically enough, they use Lazaridis' 2014 study to "prove" that Ashkenazim aren't "white". Before getting into how the study itself exposes them, we will have to understand a few things. How does being "Middle Eastern" oppose being "white"? It doesn't; light skin in Europeans originated from the Middle East and there are millions of what we could call "white Middle Easterners" who possess "white skin" due to the same specific genes SHARED between Europeans. That aside, most Sicilians wouldn't be classified as "white" in a skin colour sense.
Southern Italy and Greece are closer to Turkey and the Southern Caucasus than to anywhere in Northern or Eastern Europe.
Secondly, sharing a continent does NOT equal sharing ancestry in specific amounts.
www.nature.com
If we look at the FST values between Sicilians and Latvians, FST values are 0.015. Contrast that with Sicilians between Syrians. It's 0.004. Between Germans and Sicilians, it's 0.006. Between Greeks (Thessaly) and Latvians, FST values are 0.011. Between Greeks (Thessaly) and Syrians, it's 0.006. Between Greeks (Thessaly) and Germans, it's 0.004. Congratulations white supremacists! The most Northern/Eastern European shifted Greeks in Thessaly are barely closer to Germans than they are to Syrians.
If there were such thing as a "European race" then why aren't the values BETWEEN all so-called Europeans 0.001 at best? Why aren't values between any one given "European" and any one given "non-European" >0.005 at least? Because race and your European "race" is bullshit.
That's only one study. However.......
This is from another study. There is a rather notable distance between Finns and Southern Italians (all Italians really); conversely, the distances between Southern Italians and Turks, Armenians, Cypriots and Syrians is relatively small.
Now Jews weren't listed in these studies, but what about studies mentioning Jews, Greeks and various Italian populations?
This is the study y'all misuse. Lazaridis himself is aware of this nonsense. Imagine thinking you know the study better than the man himself.
Now there are no "European" zones here. If Europeans were homogenous, they'd be bunched up and easily separated from otherd KINDA LIKE HOW SICILIANS ARE BUNCHED UP WITH JEWS and seperated from most Europeans. Now, why are *they* near various Middle Eastern populations?
"Two sets of European populations are poor fits for the model. Sicilians, Maltese, and Ashkenazi Jews have EEF estimates of >100% consistent with their having more Near Eastern ancestry than can be explained via EEF admixture . *They* (emphasis mine) also cannot be jointly fit with other Europeans, and they fall in the gap between European and Near Easterners."
Unlike y'all, I can read studies. There's an "Extended Table 3" you didn't read. Let's look at it, shall we?
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
So.....we see the AMOUNTS of these ancestries DIFFER between Europeans. That fucking makes sense. If they weren't statistically SIGNIFICANT, they'd BUNCH TOGETHER. But it is NOT possible for an Estonian with 49.5% WHG, 18.3% ANE and 32.2% EEF to much with GREEKS who have 5.8% WHG, 15.1% ANE and 79.2% EEF.
Sicilians and Ashkenazi Jews actually have a 0% rate of WHG ancestry. Whereas they have a 90.3% and 93.1% respectively and a 9.7% and 6.9% ANE respectively.
Lazaridis' study is obviously useful, but others exists too. Are there are more?
Sicilians aren't included, but Tuscans (TSI) are. They look remarkably similar to Ashkenazi Jews (ASH) and DEFINITELY not like the British or Scandinavians. Same with Greeks (GRK).
An older study. What do ya know? Jews and Greeks are highly similar. Odd, I thought Greeks were "White Europeans" and closer to Germans and Swedes.
Even if we use uniparental studies, the same conclusion will be apparent because there's no disagreement in the fact that Jews and Greeks are related. None.
At least the Nordicists are honest about this. We know why a portion of white supremacists want to latch onto Greeks and (Southern) Italians. They want to claim their legacies as THEIR own. Unfortunately, we have too much evidence that these "legacies" have Middle Eastern roots and in more than just trade but also biology.
It wouldn't make sense for a white supremacist to say that all of these are "Western Eurasian" because that would imply that the ones from "Europe" (especially the aforementioned Greeks and Italians) aren't so special. It would imply admitting that there was significant genetic flow between the two areas. Which is a fact but it would crush their ideology. It would imply that skin colour differences between Southern Italians/Greeks and Northern Europeans is due to substantial Middle Eastern ancestry as opposed to "tanning". It would imply that there isn't a "racial barrier" between Anatolia and Thrace which there ISN'T. It would also imply that Jews cannot be separated from European. Which. They. Cannot.
At the end of the day, even these "pseudo-inclusive" white supremacists (who still reject Turkish Thracians and Albanians BTW) are still Nordicists. They project their nonsense onto Greeks and Southern Italians. They impose Anglo-Nordic concepts on Greeks and Southern Italians. The idea that the most genetically diverse countries in Europe are "homogenous" is projection; NORTHERN Europe (and especially the British Isles) is homogenous.
Also, I find it hilarious how the darkest of "Europeans" are used as pawns for a subset of white supremacists.
Southern Italy and Greece are closer to Turkey and the Southern Caucasus than to anywhere in Northern or Eastern Europe.
Secondly, sharing a continent does NOT equal sharing ancestry in specific amounts.
Genome-wide analysis of Corsican population reveals a close affinity with Northern and Central Italy - Scientific Reports
Despite being the fourth largest island in the Mediterranean basin, the genetic variation of Corsica has not been explored as exhaustively as Sardinia, which is situated only 11 km South. However, it is likely that the populations of the two islands shared, at least in part, similar demographic...
www.nature.com
If we look at the FST values between Sicilians and Latvians, FST values are 0.015. Contrast that with Sicilians between Syrians. It's 0.004. Between Germans and Sicilians, it's 0.006. Between Greeks (Thessaly) and Latvians, FST values are 0.011. Between Greeks (Thessaly) and Syrians, it's 0.006. Between Greeks (Thessaly) and Germans, it's 0.004. Congratulations white supremacists! The most Northern/Eastern European shifted Greeks in Thessaly are barely closer to Germans than they are to Syrians.
If there were such thing as a "European race" then why aren't the values BETWEEN all so-called Europeans 0.001 at best? Why aren't values between any one given "European" and any one given "non-European" >0.005 at least? Because race and your European "race" is bullshit.
That's only one study. However.......
This is from another study. There is a rather notable distance between Finns and Southern Italians (all Italians really); conversely, the distances between Southern Italians and Turks, Armenians, Cypriots and Syrians is relatively small.
Now Jews weren't listed in these studies, but what about studies mentioning Jews, Greeks and various Italian populations?
This is the study y'all misuse. Lazaridis himself is aware of this nonsense. Imagine thinking you know the study better than the man himself.
Now there are no "European" zones here. If Europeans were homogenous, they'd be bunched up and easily separated from otherd KINDA LIKE HOW SICILIANS ARE BUNCHED UP WITH JEWS and seperated from most Europeans.
Now, why are *they* near various Middle Eastern populations?"Two sets of European populations are poor fits for the model. Sicilians, Maltese, and Ashkenazi Jews have EEF estimates of >100% consistent with their having more Near Eastern ancestry than can be explained via EEF admixture . *They* (emphasis mine) also cannot be jointly fit with other Europeans, and they fall in the gap between European and Near Easterners."
Unlike y'all, I can read studies. There's an "Extended Table 3" you didn't read. Let's look at it, shall we?
Ancient human genomes suggest three ancestral populations for present-day Europeans - PMC
We sequenced the genomes of a ~7,000 year old farmer from Germany and eight ~8,000 year old hunter-gatherers from Luxembourg and Sweden. We analyzed these and other ancient genomes1–4 with 2,345 contemporary humans to show that most present ...
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
So.....we see the AMOUNTS of these ancestries DIFFER between Europeans. That fucking makes sense. If they weren't statistically SIGNIFICANT, they'd BUNCH TOGETHER. But it is NOT possible for an Estonian with 49.5% WHG, 18.3% ANE and 32.2% EEF to much with GREEKS who have 5.8% WHG, 15.1% ANE and 79.2% EEF.
Sicilians and Ashkenazi Jews actually have a 0% rate of WHG ancestry. Whereas they have a 90.3% and 93.1% respectively and a 9.7% and 6.9% ANE respectively.
Lazaridis' study is obviously useful, but others exists too. Are there are more?
Sicilians aren't included, but Tuscans (TSI) are. They look remarkably similar to Ashkenazi Jews (ASH) and DEFINITELY not like the British or Scandinavians. Same with Greeks (GRK).
An older study. What do ya know? Jews and Greeks are highly similar. Odd, I thought Greeks were "White Europeans" and closer to Germans and Swedes.
Even if we use uniparental studies, the same conclusion will be apparent because there's no disagreement in the fact that Jews and Greeks are related. None.
At least the Nordicists are honest about this. We know why a portion of white supremacists want to latch onto Greeks and (Southern) Italians. They want to claim their legacies as THEIR own. Unfortunately, we have too much evidence that these "legacies" have Middle Eastern roots and in more than just trade but also biology.
It wouldn't make sense for a white supremacist to say that all of these are "Western Eurasian" because that would imply that the ones from "Europe" (especially the aforementioned Greeks and Italians) aren't so special. It would imply admitting that there was significant genetic flow between the two areas. Which is a fact but it would crush their ideology. It would imply that skin colour differences between Southern Italians/Greeks and Northern Europeans is due to substantial Middle Eastern ancestry as opposed to "tanning". It would imply that there isn't a "racial barrier" between Anatolia and Thrace which there ISN'T. It would also imply that Jews cannot be separated from European. Which. They. Cannot.
At the end of the day, even these "pseudo-inclusive" white supremacists (who still reject Turkish Thracians and Albanians BTW) are still Nordicists. They project their nonsense onto Greeks and Southern Italians. They impose Anglo-Nordic concepts on Greeks and Southern Italians. The idea that the most genetically diverse countries in Europe are "homogenous" is projection; NORTHERN Europe (and especially the British Isles) is homogenous.
Also, I find it hilarious how the darkest of "Europeans" are used as pawns for a subset of white supremacists.
.
