Talking with Henrik Palmgren


The title of the Red Ice Radio podcast sums up our discussion very well: Tanstaafl – Race, Biology & Modus Operandi of Jewish Extremists – Hour 1.

Some relevant context is provided via the links in the bottom half of the RIR page. See these as well:

The Racial Roots of Europeans – Part 1 and William Pierce’s Who We Are: a Series of Articles on the History of the White Race.

The Country Club Thing describes Revilo Oliver’s take on Claudius’ letter of warning to the jews of Alexandria, dated 41 AD.

The inequality of human races : Gobineau, Arthur, comte de, 1816-1882, Internet Archive.

The Ugly Nationalist Politics of Human Origins, The Daily Beast, 12 September 2015.

French far-right leader to face trial for inciting racial hatred, Yahoo News, 22 Sep 2015.

German politician Gregor Gysi calls native Germans “Nazis” and their extinction “fortunate”, YouTube.

The real meaning of Jaws is the “JPost” article I referred to, it’s actually from The Jewish Chronicle.

A White Guide to the Jewish Narrative, What’s Flipping Yid Lids Today: The Coultercaust, and A Personal Disclosure.

UPDATE 4 April 2016: Talking with Henrik Palmgren, Hour 2.

50 thoughts on “Talking with Henrik Palmgren”

  1. Dear Whoeveryouare, I love (x 6 million), what you are doing, saying, blogging, thinking! Big fan of Mr Palmgren, Mr Duke, Dr Ron Paul (all bow when you hear his name), Mr Rense and anyone who is awakened. Sleepy gentilemen of European extraction should be on their guard to expose, condemn and take down in every conceivable way these satanic psychopath. Enjoying my status as racist anti-Semite as I merrily bring the topic up with everyone I corner in a supermarket…..bus stop…..public loo… office….dinner party…..airport….. Seriously…..the only way is to stealthily assassinate the associates of these sewer breeders…..and the rats themselves…..oops, did I just say what? Dear, understand me, we have an enemy, the enemy is present, we are in a war, the war is undeclared! Dear, we must speak out, we must expose their lies, and we must take no prisoners. ……she smiles as she says, ” have a nice day”. Hehehehe!

  2. Hello Tanstaafl,

    I am a 67 yr. Dubliner living on Vancouver Island, in British Columbia.
    I listen to every Red Ice interview as they come on air and I’ve gone back into the archives quite a bit but there are still many shows to listen to yet. I started to subscribe about a 18 months ago.

    Thank you for your contribution on Red Ice. It was a great talk. You have a very clear way of expressing yourself and obviously have done a lot of work on the subject of the influence the Jews are having in society at large and have had in history. I will re listen to your talk as I make time. There is so much there.

    However, this evening I want to send you these thoughts.

    I would like to offer you a clue to a question you seem to have about the origin of the species. The Telestia called man ‘Anthropos’.

    The Telestai, meaning ‘those who are aimed’, were insultingly called Gnostics, to mean “know it alls”, by the early Christians.

    John Lamb Lash, who has appeared on Red Ice 8 times, gave a talk called “The Unrifted Flake” which you can find on his website here:

    At min. 47 or so he begins talking about the origin of man on this planet as he has been able to divine from his research as a comparative mythologist and as someone who communicates with the planetary mother herself, Gaia/Sophia.

    Sophia, the Greek for wisdom, was the name the Telestai gave to the planet earth, with whom they communicated with in a practice called divine matesis, meaning learning by going into the ‘organic light’ of the Aeon, the goddess, Sophia and asking her questions.

    If you would like to hear a really good telling of the Sophianic Myth as recounted by the Telestai and from how John has been able to piece it together from the Nag Hamadi texts found in Egypt in 1945, then please have a listen to his interviews with Lisa Harrison near the top of this page on his website

    By his own admission, these interviews are his best ‘tellings’ of this myth so far. I concur. I have listened to other tellings of the myth elsewhere on his site and this rendition is the best by far.

    From some of your comments on Red Ice it would seem like you are almost ready to bow out of the war effort having done so much work to get to where you are now in your understanding of why mankind finds itself on the precipice of extinction. This is the time when you are needed the most.

    Please don’t. You have too much to offer.

    Thanks again for everything you put into the interview.

    Kind regards,

    Seamus Duggan

  3. Excellent podcast, Tanstaafl. I want to thank you for all the great work you’ve done thus far–as you have been both an inspiration to me and one of the key influences in regards to my awakening process.

    Your glorious deeds will be remembered forever, brother.

  4. Tans,
    I found within a longer talk the segment wherein John Lash describes how the Telestai explained the method of human reproduction which the Aeon Sophia intended the petelios rhome, Coptic for ‘ultimate ( form of ) man’, to reproduce.

    It can be heard in this You Tube clip

    I figure that this clip is from the complete talk on You Tube here :

    Kind regards,

    Seamus Duggan

  5. Good show Tan. Sorry to hear you’re scaling back your work on WN. It truly is irreplaceable. If I may ask? does this have anything to do with Yeagers threat of a dox? It crossed my mind because of the timing.

    Your interviews are always very informative this one being no exception. It would be nice and helpful if you did more. Either way, and if not you’ve done a lot and helped many.

  6. Seamus, no offense intended, but I’m not familiar with you or Lash, so I’m reluctant to publish any more long comments about what he has to say.

    Ron, I’ll think about putting together a more substantial list, but the briefest, most relevant piece of writing I can recommend is MacDonald’s Jewish Involvement in Shaping American Immigration Policy, 1881-1965: A Historical Review.

    Books re race: Gobineau’s The Inequality of Human Races, Grant’s The Passing of the Great Race.

    Books re jews: Oliver’s Jewish Strategy, MacDonald’s Culture of Critique, Cuddihy’s Ordeal of Civility.

  7. Chris,

    Thank you. Scaling back is a fair characterization, because I haven’t given up, I’m just no longer committed to deliver weekly podcasts/posts. Carolyn’s “offer” came afterward. The prospect of her or anyone else outing me has never kept me from saying what I want to say.

  8. Tanstaafl,

    No offence taken. Thank you again for all your work and for your reply to my comments.

    Kind regards,


  9. Fantastic interview. I’m sharing it with all who might be receptive. No Tan, write a book. What if we lose the internet. Write man Write.

  10. Dear Tanstaafl,
    Very interesting interview, you are very good at formulating your thoughts clearly, and has obviously done alot of homework.
    Listening to your interview put some things into perspective, a scary perspective, and its very clear to me how crucial the times we are living in are. The jews have now seized control over the operating system in western civilisation, they have gained massive control on so many different levels. What is needed for them is someone to play us out against, the foot soldiers to do the dirty work. The peaking invasion is the fruit of decades of work. It seems a little wierd though however, since arabs are the most jew aware group that exists.
    I live in Denmark, where the majority of people are getting sick of the invasion, these last months have awoken alot of people, and many are starting to realize the reality finally – however you still cant mention the jews, and no one ever does. I support the most nationalist wannabe mainstream party there is, I saw one guy alluring to something remotely related to jews on facebook, and the leader of the party went out of his way attacking this guy, and demanded an appology to not ban him from the group. Its a testemont to the amazing programming jews have done, that most people will immidiately shut off if you dear speak their name in anything that isnt praise.

  11. You may not want to be a leader, but you can certainly be an asset to the noblest cause.
    Your readings and commentaries have already proven to be a benefit for those seeking the truth. If you have the occasional free time and inclination you could do an audiobook of the
    race related books you mentioned, along with your ever cogent commentary.

    All the best to you and a very happy Halloween :)

  12. taanstafl,

    I think it’s important to point out that Ashkenazi Jews have predominantly white genes even though in their minds they’re unique ‘Jews’ who can endlessly promote ethnic self-interest whilst everyone else has to be their slave.

  13. @ thereisnobluepill,

    Please explain why it is important to say that Ashkenazi Jews are White!

    On the contrary, it is important to point out that they are genetically foreign to the White race, and that our looks, personality and behavior are tightly linked to our genetic identity.

  14. @thereisnobluepill

    “important to point out that Ashkenazi Jews have predominantly white genes”

    Humans share 99% of our DNA with chimpanzees and bonobos. Does that make you an ape? Real subtle mind you have there. Hint: read the fine print and look under the skin.

  15. Tanstaafl,

    in 2nd hour of interview at approx. time 37:15 you talk about some BBC Series which I cannot pronounce as english is not my primary language.

    It goes like this:

    “…but there are those kind of things. In **** **** (naby??) which is very popular period piece from the BBC, it’s there, this whole thing about the transition, the progress of society away from the evil anglo-saxon way of doing things…”

    What is this “period piece from BBC” that you talked about?

    Thanks for reply.

  16. Vlad,

    The drama is Downton Abbey. The exchange was between the Dowager (Violet, representing the slipping Anglo-Saxons) and Levinson (Martha, representing the jewed “American” elite displacing them):

    Martha: “Violet, forgive me, and I don’t mean to be offensive, but are you always this stuck-up?”

    Violet: “Do tell me, do tell me: is the new Lady Aysgarth all set to hold London enthralled with tales of how the West was won?”

    Martha: “I turned him down. You see, I have no wish to be a great lady.”

    Violet: “A decision that must be reinforced whenever you look in the glass.”

    Martha: “Violet, I don’t mind looking in the mirror because what I see is a woman who’s not afraid of the future. My world is coming nearer and your world is slipping further and further away.

    Here’s a similar exchange, same characters:

    The Levinson character is an American non-jew who married a rich jew, who then died. Their daughter married the Dowager’s son, jewing her line.

  17. Andrew Joyce’s latest is excellent – Reflections on Jewish Intermarriage into Native Elites:

    Although the salons of Prussia and Paris facilitated the extension and deepening of Jewish influence, no nineteenth-century native elite was subjected to Jewish penetration as strongly as the British aristocracy. In 1936 England’s Arnold Leese, a former military veterinarian and leader of a small Fascist group, published a pamphlet titled Our Jewish Aristocracy: A Revelation. At the outset of the publication, Leese wrote that he wished to impress upon his fellow Britons that “their race is being displaced and replaced, and without notice to any individual.” Compared with our contemporary situation, Leese couldn’t even imagine what genuine displacement and replacement would actually look like. However, what Leese did manage to produce was a valuable, though imperfect, piece of research that made a convincing case for the argument that the British elite was being slowly displaced and replaced with Jewish genes.

    (Downton Abbey is set in 1914-1920s.)

  18. Tan,
    You are brilliant and your work should continue, half Jewish wife or not. Truth is truth. If your wife is okay with your work, then why do you feel so….alienated?
    Clearly, your marriage has not compromised your integrity.
    Keep up the work.

  19. You were asked if you wanted to write a book. I think you absolutely should. Even though your ideas for the most part art not new, they take take this entire school of though to a new level. You’re nailing it more than it ever before has been nailed. I think you should write an ideo-political authbiography where you explain you transformation from a neo-con to where you are today. As well as why this transformation took place. It would become a classic.


  20. You have come to be an absolute authority on the Jewish question. It all makes sense. The fine middle way between the mere conspiracy theory stuff and not being willing to consider it at all. I actually think your Jewish wife could help legitimize your case, so don’t even worry about that.

    Just wanted to add that.

  21. I second the absolute authority moniker.
    Your half Jewish wife doesn’t run the FED, the IMF, the World Bank, Hollywood, or Wall St.
    At your level of understanding of the JQ, clearly the random Jewish person who runs the corner laundry is not to blame for the fall of western civilization, and your innocent wife is not to blame.

    Organized Jewry, however, is very much to blame for the fall of the west, and knowing this you can’t very well just drop the topic and forget about it.

    Those of us who see clearly have a responsibility toward those who can’t see at all.

  22. I listened to the Red Ice Radio podcast. One thing I noticed in the convo about what Tanstaafl said about modern academia and modern White scientists which I disagree with.

    It’s actually a 19th and early 20th century concept to call the Indo-Europeans “Aryans”. Historically, [talking about ancient history to the European Renaissance] the only group of people before the 19th and early 20th century to call themselves “Aryans” were the Indo-Iranian groups of ancient Persia and India. So the fact modern academia and science has gone back to not referencing historic Indo-Europeans or the hypothetical Proto Indo-European speakers as Aryans is just fine IMO and makes sense. The ancient Celts, nor Germans, nor Norsemen or Vikings, or even the ancient or Medieval Greeks ever called themselves “Aryans”. Nor is there any evidence the Proto Indo-European (who likely lived on the Eurasian steppe) did. So I don’t get what Tanstaafl is complaining about modern academia or modern Western-White scientists not referencing all Indo-Europeans or Europeans or even so called Nordics as “Aryans”. These are all just 19th and early 20th century revisionist histories now abandoned.

    But overall an interesting discussion none the less.

  23. Arch Hades,

    So I don’t get what Tanstaafl is complaining about modern academia or modern Western-White scientists not referencing all Indo-Europeans or Europeans or even so called Nordics as “Aryans”. These are all just 19th and early 20th century revisionist histories now abandoned.

    The work of earlier White racialists was not demonstrated as incorrect and thus rightly abandoned, it was psychopathologized and made taboo by pseudo-scientific fraud, specifically by use of jew-driven, jew-serving, anti-“racist”, “brotherhood of mankind” narrative. The contemporary academic avoidance of the term Aryan is just one small but telling consequence. Overall, this disconnect and alienation from earlier understanding is a handicap for Whites, a disadvantage:

    If you’re interested in more detail, I made a series of podcasts laying out how anti-“racist” narrative derailed race science. Start with Race and Genetics – Part 1, or skip to the conclusion in Race and Fraud: The Races of Mankind – Part 4.

  24. The main article I’ve read about Aryans is that article by Irmin Vinson:

    People we call Aryans originally didn’t live in Europe or India. It means they were not technically Indian or European. Even so, they were White people and looked more like Europeans of the pre-Aryan-invasion era than like dark-skinned Indians. So, there is no reason to call them “Indo”.

    From Irmin Vinson’s old blog:
    “Europe is European because the conquerors and the conquered were members of the same White race, different branches on the same family tree; India is a morass of poverty because the bulk of the conquered, with whom the Indo-Aryans eventually intermarried, were non-White Veddoids.”

    Scientists know much more about this today than 20 years ago. Unfortunately, Jewish power makes it difficult to spread the knowledge through the media and get people excited about it.

  25. Armor, see that article you posted I disagree with, at least partially, because it uses the term ‘Aryan’ synonymously with Proto Indo-European.

    While it is true that some academics in the 19th and early 20th century used it synonomously with Proto Indo-European…historically before these times there’s no evidence of it being used as an ethnic connotation for the majority of Indo-European groups outside of the Indo-Iranians. And as far as I know, the term Aryan cannot be reconstructed into Proto Indo-European because it’s lacking in all other Indo-European daughter languages outside of Indo-Iranians.

    BTW, those interested in the science. All Europeans do have ancestry stemming from the proto Indo-Europeans. A recent study using prehistoric genomes modeled contemporary Northern Europeans as having 40-50% of their ancestry stemming from the Proto Indo-Europeans who lived out on the Eurasian steppe, while Southern Europeans aside from the Sardinians had a lessor (but still certainly significant) 20-30% admixture estimate.

    And yes, obviously it is likely that the Proto Indo-Europeans were much more racially close to the people in Europe they mixed with (Mesolithic Hunter Gatherers and Neolithic Farmers) rather than the peoples in South Asian. In Europe there was no caste system either.

  26. Is that last right, Arch Hades? MacDonald’s recent exercise in bending over backwards to please, ultimately Jewish, critics, and look into White psychology for reasons why *this* is happening to us, brought forth the claim, surprising to me, that ‘Aryans’ left behind more of their genes in South-eastern Europeans and progressively fewer as you move North-westward.

    I had never looked into Aryans, and had only picked up some of the talk from people who saw themselves as Nordic (and therefore Aryan) loyalist vs Southern and Slavic groups back when that was an issue. Plus MSM coverage of the Third Reich which usually says the Germans saw themselves and other North-westerners as the purest descendants of the Aryans.


    Anyway, they’re not around today, we are.

  27. I mentioned during the interview that I wanted to resolve whether contemporary Nordics are more hunter-gatherer (as per MacDonald) or more Aryan (as per Pierce’s Who We Are).

    I think I found the answer. The maps here indicate that Nordics are more hunter-gatherer, more Aryan, and less EEF than other Europeans.

    It’s still not clear whether Nordics are more hunter-gatherer or Aryan. Though Aryans brought all the ANE in they also shared some ancestry with both WHG and EEF, so some portion of those percentages are attributable to them as well.

    Whatever the mix, MacDonald seems determined to believe Jared Taylor’s “White pathology”/”pathological altruism” BS. Until recently he’s argued it’s rooted in hunter-gatherer genes. Lately he’s shifted emphasis to individualism, which he sees coming from the Aryans as well. The Nordfront interview was interesting. After he explained how powerful culture is, how it can override inborn instincts, and how the jews basically dominate the media, academia, and culture, the interviewers gently encouraged him (as David Duke did a few months ago) to confront and acknowledge the behavior of jews as parasitic, rather than merely competitive.

  28. Arch Hades: “there’s no evidence of [the term ‘Aryan’] being used as an ethnic connotation for the majority of Indo-European groups outside of the Indo-Iranians”

    But there is even less evidence of them calling themselves “proto-Indo-Europeans”. Actually, they had nothing to do with Indians.

    It says here (etymonline) that ‘Aryan’ is the name Sanskrit-speaking invaders of India gave themselves in the ancient texts.

    Aryan sounds definitely better than “Proto-Indo-Europeans”, a phrase designed to sound anti-romantic, as if our ancestors from Southern-Russia were half-Indians bumpkins living in caves, when in fact, they were builders of civilizations.

    If you don’t like Aryan, you should try to come up with some other word or phrase. Something more inspiring than Proto-Indian. For example: Noble civilization builders, White people from the steppes… Maybe if you admire the landscape of the Pontic-Caspian steppe, it will inspire you to find a name for our ancestors who lived there: google street

  29. the term Aryan cannot be reconstructed into Proto Indo-European because it’s lacking in all other Indo-European daughter languages outside of Indo-Iranians.

    If it’s incorrect to call them Aryan because only the subset who ended up in Iran used something like that name, then calling them “Indo-European” isn’t any better. None of them ever called themselves that.

  30. @Nick Dean

    “Aryan” genes if you want to call them that, or ” Proto Indo-European”/Steppe genes, are higher in Northern Europe than Southern Europe, by about 2x. However, pre Indo-European /pre Neolithic Hunter Gatherer genes are ALSO higher in Northern Europe by over 2x. So Macdonald is correct on that as well. Southern Europeans are about on average 2/3rds Neolithic farmer, the rest being “Proto Indo-European”/Steppe and Hunter-Gather. Northern Europeans on the other hand are only about 1/5 to 1/3rd Neolithic farmer. In prehistoric times, In Europe, Neolithic farmers [who came from Asia Minor] just had a huge population density around the Mediterranean, and although the Bronze Age Indo-European migrations were big enough for a major language shift in most of Southern Europe, the genes of the Neolithic groups is still the most dominant set of ancestral genes in present Southern Europeans. These Neolithic farmers were the ones who orgiinally brought agriculture to Europe, and agriculture greatly increased population density. In Northern Europe at the time of the Proto Indo-European expansion [maybe 3,000 BC] the population density was indeed much lower because they had only just recently undertaken agricultural practices and even a few areas around the Baltic and Northern-Central Scandinavia were not agricultural. Southern Europe on the other hand had been practicing agriculture since at least 6,000 BC.

    Macdonald’s theories about personality are pure hypothesis, but perhaps some of the universalistic-untribalistic altruism you find peaking so high in modern Northern Europeans is because of pre Neolithic and pre Indo-European Hunter-Gatherer genes. That makes some sense IMO, but I don’t know how much we can really know about Hunter-Gatherer culture since they lived so long ago in a time before recorded history.

    @ Tansstaffl

    IMO, It’s not necessarily ‘incorrect’ to call the the Proto Indo-Europeans Aryans, but I’m just saying it’s a modern European concept from the 19th and early 20th century. Calling them Aryans is basically like our right to be Eurocentric or something, if you want to rationalize it. Where I disagreed with you is I don’t think modern White scientists who are trying to understand European genetic history are being “PC” by just simply naming Indo-European migrations “Indo-European migrations” and not “Aryan migrations”. Because of WWII and all that stuff there is a lot of stigma associated with the word “Aryan” being used as anything other than it’s very old and ancient particular use. I feel the scientists are probably just being fair and at best unEurocentric.

    We don’t know what the proto Indo-Europeans called themselves since they had no written language, all knowledge we have of them comes from phonological similarities in historic Indo-European languages. They most certainly did exist though, because the languages definitely have a common ancestor. But I think the fact only Indo-Iranians referenced themselves as particularly “Aryan” and not other Indo-European groups probably means the proto Indo-Europeans didn’t reference themselves as that. Perhaps a related word but likely not exactly “Aryan” IMO.

    And yes, the discovery of a united Indo-European language family only happened in the 18th century. The Proto Indo-Europeans definitely didn’t call themselves “Indo-Europeans”…but they did exist and are our ancestors.

  31. Proto Indo-Europeans Aryans, but I’m just saying it’s a modern European concept from the 19th and early 20th century.

    “Indo-European” is even more recent and thus less valid by this standard.

    Calling them Aryans is basically like our right to be Eurocentric or something

    Europeans are not Eurocentric enough! It was Europeans who discovered the Aryans, after all, and that’s the original term they settled on using for them.

    So far you’ve offered no reason to stop using the term Aryan that doesn’t apply just as well to “Indo-European”.

    I don’t think modern White scientists who are trying to understand European genetic history are being “PC” by just simply naming Indo-European migrations “Indo-European migrations” and not “Aryan migrations”. Because of WWII and all that stuff there is a lot of stigma associated with the word “Aryan”

    Whether you call it PC (semitical correctness would be better) or stigma, this is what I’m telling you is the real reason for the change in terms. It is because jews now dominate academia, and because for them anything even remotely associated with White racial consciousness, and most especially anything reminiscent of the NSDAP, drives them bananas. Eventually they’ll claim even “Indo-European” is too White and needs to change.

  32. Adding my few cents to the Aryan discussion.

    90% of biological anthropologists before the second world war considered Northern Europeans, and the Nordic racial phenotype in particular and in general, to be the closest living descendants of the invading Indo-Europeans. These included the well known ones like Gobineau, Deniker, Grant, Ripley, Stoddart etc. Modern archaeological and genetic studies have confirmed this but are extremely careful not to reveal too much.

    This said, it is also very much correct as has been said that Northern Europeans also have comparatively high share of hunter-gatherer (cro-magnon) DNA, although not as much Eastern Europeans, or Slavs, if you will. While Northern Europeans have the most Indo-European DNA, Eastern Europeans have the most cro-magnon DNA. Southern Europeans have the most neolithic invader DNA. Again, this was mainstream anthropology before WWII and has been proven true by recent genetic studies akin to the one posted above.

    There is a logical explanation for this mysterious IE refuge in Scandinavia: it is a geographically separated peninsula from the rest of the European continent. Any invading population making it into Scandinavia was likely to be the most preserved there. In contrast to the rest of Europe, Scandinavia was never again invaded by a foreign population after the introduction of the Indo-Europeans.

    Where does the concept of the Aryan come from? Well, Gobineau is most likely the first to have used it scientifically. You will find the word “aris”, meaning “best” in ancient Greek though, later giving origin to the word “aristocraty”, meaning rule by the best. However, it is true what has been said that it was the early Hindus and Persians that called themselves “Aryans” but keep in mind that modern day Iranians and Indians, who to this day insist upon being pure Aryans, are of a very different stock than the population invading these areas some thousand years ago. The only places one can still see traces of it in these regions now are in the higher castes of India and in isolated mountain populations, for example within the Kalash people.

    It was the Indo-Europeans who invaded these areas, not modern day Indians. As mentioned, there is scientific consensus around that Northern Europeans, and the Nordic racial phenotype in particular, are the closest living descendant of the Indo-Europeans. The best evidence of this are the hundreds of mummies found all over Asia with Northern European traits, such a the Tarim mummies.

    I think the general confusion arises from the though that only Europe is native to whites, when in reality, traits such as blue eyes and blonde hair was to a large extent introduced to Europe from the Asian steppe and the near east. The center of gravity for “white traits” were in Asia for thousands of years. Of course, they are practically extinct in these areas now, so today the center of gravity is in Europe and North America. Who knows where it will be in a 1000 years.

    A tendency towards universalism, idealism and altruism were really always said to be defining traits for the Aryans in the pre-war racialist literature. One see these tendencies today to be the strongest in Northern Europe and the areas they colonized (US etc) as well. McDonald really turns it on the head when he attributes it to hunter-gatherers. Nonetheless, it is a characteristic that has made the race very capable (of conquering and exploring) but ironically, also very vulnerable.

  33. @Tanstaafl

    What is your opinion on this Quote from J.P. Mallory on page 125 of his book “In search of the Indo-Europeans?”

    “We must also take a brief glance at the most loaded of Indo-European words—Aryan. An an ethnic designation, the word is most properly limited to the Indo-Iranians, and most justly to the latter where it still gives its name to the country Iran (from Avestan genitive plural airyanam through later Iranian eran to iran). The great Persian king Darius described himself as Aryan. The term was also widely used in India where it referred to one who was a member of the community (though details of who was included in the community have been the topic of wide and unsettled debate). Whether the ethnic designation was limited to the Indo-Iranians or not is difficult to say. A possible cognate appears in Hittie, for example, where it indicates ‘kinsman, friend’, and there also appears here the negative expression natta ara ‘not proper to the community’, that is, ‘not done’. Although some claim that this root can be found in the names of many other Indo-European peoples, for example, Irish Eriu and aire, this would require more argument thanis worth the effort and we are safer to remain with the general consensus that it does not rather than to pursue this matter further.”

    This passage is marked with an interesting footnote: “Szemernyi (1977, 125-149) provides a thorough summary of all the arguments concerning the word arya- and concludes that it is not even Indo-European but a Near Eastern, probably Ugaritic, loan word meaning ‘kinsman, companion’.

    I think Mallory is just being an objective scientist, not someone afraid of political or social scorn for not labeling all Indo-European groups as Aryan. BTW, Mallory is a White man of Irish descent and not a Jewish usurper. Regardless I recommend anyone in European prehistory to read his book, it’s one of the best in regarding the proto Indo-European question.

    @ Aristede Hird

    From what I can tell based on modern science and genetics, the Nordic racial type..or rather the common phenotype you see in contemporary Northern Europeans, though preserves a high amount of proto Indo-European ancestry [40-50%], is also influenced very much from Western Hunter Gatherers and even Neolithic farmers. In fact ancient genomics is now showing it was Western Hunter Gatherers that were almost uniformly blue eyed for instance, while the invading steppe cultures buried in Kurgan mounds which are associates with Proto Indo-European were not [Yamnaya culture, etc]. So saying they physically represent Proto Indo-Europeans is like saying Mulattos represent their Black or White parents. It’s kind of backward. I don’t think the phenotype we call Nordic existed in high frequency in a population until Indo-Europeans breed with pre Indo-European Hunter Gatherers and Neolithic farmers in North-Central Europe. The resulting mixture is when high degree of “Nordic looking” populations came into being.

  34. Hi,
    I listened on the interview on Red Ice. I think it was one of their better pieces recently.

    You were right about many things, to point out one: When you stated that things are pretty much repeating themselves and there’s not that much new to publish, that was very much correct, and also rather sad. Because, it seems that at this point, nothing is going to stop this machine.

    The US is garbage land by now, the White people’s only hope is Eastern Europe, and that is tragic. Eastern Europe is plagued by Jewish DNA, it is rather hard seeing an Eastern European without some Jew in them. True, there are many pure Slavs in Russia, but, observe their parliament, observe their media, some details cannot be hidden.

    It is no wonder how/why Russia and many neighboring states are swimming in oceans of corruption, it’s in their code by now. (Observe Israel, always at the very top of the OECD corruption scale and they can’t blame anyone else there).

    I’ve had to think many times about the chicken and egg type question, is the Russian genome pre disposed towards erecting corrupt and abusive governments, or is the the Jewish mixing that caused the above, hard to tell.
    I think it’s a bit of both. Mainly due to seeing how Russians act when they emigrate as a group – they don’t spread and start a fresh, they gather as city dwellers and establish a community with clear in/out group relationships, much like Jews. But, then again, many of these Russians are Jewish or part Jewish, so, the circle never seems to end.

  35. Aristede Hird, my understanding largely corresponds with what you describe in your 1st, 2nd, and last paragraphs. Thanks. The way I would put it is that the theories and understanding of pre-WWII racialists, and even a few like Carleton Coon post-WWII, have not been invalidated but instead have been demonstrated mostly sound by ongoing “population genetics” and physical anthropological research. It is not broadcast as such only because it is completely at odds with the semitically correct anti-“scientific racism” imperative that now dominates cultural anthropology and social science generally.

  36. Arch Hades, the most common indication of Nordic/Aryan phenotypical similarity has always been skull shape, not eye color. The eye color of early man was unknowable prior to DNA sequencing, so naturally some racialists may have guessed wrongly about it. What we know about skull shape, on the other hand, is that jew pseudo-scientists like Boas and Gould actively engaged in fraud in order to promote the wrong interpretation – and to this day the jewed regime celebrates them.

    So saying they physically represent Proto Indo-Europeans is like saying Mulattos represent their Black or White parents. It’s kind of backward.

    It is less backward than using the term “Proto Indo-Europeans” to describe a people who never physically lived in India, or worse, using “Indo-Europeans” to describe the precise subset of their descendents who migrated exclusively into Europe.

    I think Mallory, as an academician and editor of the Journal of Indo-European Studies, has a vested interest in rationalizing the replacement of Aryan by a euphemism. Perhaps you are in the same boat. His main argument is along the same lines as the one you’ve already provided, and as I’ve already pointed out the term “Indo European” is even less valid by such a standard. I think his concern to conform to the “general consensus”, which he expresses almost as an afterthought, is actually the key.

    My argument is that the general consensus of White racialists prior to WWII was, on the whole, correct. Thus much of the change in their terminology is driven not by a need to correct any real error, but by social and political pressure to conform to the current jew-driven, jew-serving, anti-White general consensus, to signal their repudiation of racialists and their understanding. My argument is that the replacement of the term Aryan by “Indo-European” is emblematic of this.

  37. I don’t know what skull Shape the proto Indo-Europeans had. There are reconstructions of the Yamnaya [who are identified as the middle to late Proto Indo-Europeans by most archaeologists and linguists] made by the Russians though, take that for what they are…I question the absolute accuracy of reconstructions anyway. But they definitely look like they wouldnt raise much an eyebrow in Europe. These are the same Yamnaya/steppe peoples modern Northern Europeans have been shown to derive about half their ancestry from as I provided the study [Haak et al] in that link several comments above.

    Pigmentation of prehistoric European genomes frequencies are known though, Yamnaya circa 3,000 BC don’t seem to be very light on average at all in eyes or skinn. Yamnaya were tall though, and my guess is a major reason why Northern Europeans have their taller stature is their greater Steppe admixture. As for Hunter gatherers, even by around 6,000 BC they pretty are dark skinned by modern Eurocentric standards, but were beginning to develop light skin. Both Scandinavian and Western European Hunter Gatherers were universally blue eyed which I find interesting, even more blue eyed than modern Scandinavians and Finns. Neolithic farmers are also mostly dark eyed. You can check out the study here, page 11 and page 21 have some graphs and data of what i’m talking about.

  38. BTW, yes I agree, Skull shape is definitely mostly genetically determined, unlike whatever Boas tried to falsely show. Actually modern cranio-facial science based on a large number of metrical variables has been shown to have very strong predictive power. There’s all sorts of information in modern scientific literature showing this.

    I think Boas just showed that the cephalic index can change a bit over time and put way to much emphasis on this. Cephalic index is only one of a great deal of skull variables. Most children have very similar cranio-facial similarity to their parents, an this is because it’s largely hereditary.

  39. Could you ask Henrik for the evidence that Christians slaughtered Europeans?

    I’ve been looking and looking and find this to be a frivolous claim.

  40. There were Christians in northwest Europe long before Rome even accepted Christianity. England was

    Charlemagne never abandon paganism and as for the “Massacre of Verden”, Charles Martel had been warring with the Saxons long before Charlemagne.

  41. Apparently your request for evidence that Christians slaughtered Europeans was frivolous.

    At any rate, in my opinion, the main problem Christianity created for Europeans was that it facilitated infiltration by jews, which in turn enabled them to foment not only sectarian strife but universalist delusions which have turned out to be just as much if not more harmful.

  42. I’m subscribed to Red Ice so I was able to listen to part 2.
    “Liberal jews wage social war on Whites at home. Right wing jews wage military war [using White soldiers] on muslims overseas.” (not exact quote but close)

    No matter how much jews disagree with each other politically they’re always in complete agreement that death to Whitey is first and foremost.

    Will you be able to publish part 2 on AoT at some point?

  43. Thanks for the reminder. Henrik and his crew are doing very good work. I’ll ask if they mind.

  44. Greetings, Tanstaafl
    I have been trying to figure out the origin of the jew. I’ve searched for, have read and have listened to hundreds of hours of other people’s work and nobody in my estimation has it completely correct nor do I know if I do. I’ve taken pieces of the puzzle I’ve adopted from others and have tried piecing them together, so I may see the big picture.
    My conclusion, which has not changed since I’ve come up with my theory concerning the jew and who/what he is, is quite simple. I’ve not ever come across documentation of a pure Jew race. Jews are always pushing the three races (Aryan, Mongoloid, Negroid) into race mixing through their cultural marxist programming. Therefore my theory is simple. A bi-racial person is jew-ish (somewhat jew) and a jew is an individual who has all three blood lines in them. In essence, jews are a racial mish-mash or a counter race… opposite of race and they desire for the pure races to become the abomination they are. The more mixed racial blood, the purer the jew. Judaism and their rabbi’s are the glue which holds this “tribe” together, since they are not a race.
    I have observed some jews have Mongoloid eyes with various skin colors and some jews have Whitish skin with the Negroid afro and the most dangerous jews to us White Aryans are the ones whom resemble us. There are many other combinations I’ve noticed as well.
    I could have gone into much more detail, however I shall wait for your thoughts concerning my theory.

    ~William de Hewitt

  45. I suppose I could have also said, these mixed race jews, who look White to the untrained eye, are very careful with whom they will mate with. It seems to me these counterfeit, White looking, mixed race jews desire to replace us pure White Aryans and rule over the darker, mixed race jew-ish and jew individuals as Kalergi envisioned.

Comments are closed.