The Ultimate "-ism": Australian Bum Jingoism

Quote M.R.

"National... Like Australians are a nation..

It's the same as if, let's say, a Serb makes a forum for Serbian preservation and then makes a banner with Slovenian symbols for Serbs living in Slovenia. After all you Germanics did to those people you have the balls to put that banner there and claim it has something to do with Germanics. Kangaroo = Australia, Australia = Germanics (because official language is Germanic and because people who spoke that language massacred original population), therefore kangaroo = Germanic.

Don't be insulted than if you find a German eagle on some pan-Turkish board, after all, there are groups like Berlin Turks which are Turkish (as you said yourself about America - "Then there are groups like Pennsylvania Germans which are also Germanic")."


I'll agree that Australia is not a nation in itself. The British Queen is still our head of state, we are still part of the Commonwealth and we Australians tend to identify strongly with our English roots, as do our largest immigrant group which welcomely hails from England. We are part of a nation but we are not a separate nation unto ourselves.

As for all of this banner drama... well, let's not get carried away with the symbolic meaning of the kangaroo. It isn't actually, and never has been, used symbolically to represent Australian aboriginal people exclusively. Not before British settlement, and not after. The kangaroo is actually quite independent of any of the cultural groups living in Australia for the most part... except when it's sitting in a roasting dish on our dinner tables that is.

This is the only real symbol that is important to the Australian aborigines and is unique to them... (can't post the pic, but maybe some of you already know what the Australian aboriginal flag looks like?)

In any case, one could choose to interpret the use of this animal on a forum banner like this... it is an animal native to the land that a portion of the English diaspora have made their home. It doesn't have to be especially symbolic or sacred to Germanics to be included in the banner.... as far as I know, this is not a criteria for creating banners on The Althing. Perhaps it should be? I guess that's up to the admin.



Citazione:
Orginalmente inviato da Talan Visualizza messaggio
Mynydd,
"You do mean anti-socialists? I mean, you claim to know something of nationalisms, yet confuse the exiled class responsible for subjugating native tribes - the Owenists - with Australia's founding fathers? The Independent British are guilty of nothing; the rejection of territorialised racisms is a virtue."

"Come again?"

Citazione:
"I'm sure the Filipino people can attest to this, don't you?"

"Says who? says what?"

ROFL I see you have just as much trouble trying to decipher Talan's posts as I do Mynydd. If you think that one was confusing, you should read some of the stuff he posts on The Althing. (No offense Talan... but you are right nutter most of the time. )

[Pirate]

Originally Posted by BridieM

Australians tend to identify strongly with our English roots, as do our largest immigrant group which welcomely hails from England. We are part of a nation but we are not a separate nation unto ourselves.

Australians do not have only English roots, since Australian can be anyone living in Australia from Abo to Anglo-Saxon to immigrant from Italy.

As for all of this banner drama... well, let's not get carried away with the symbolic meaning of the kangaroo. It isn't actually, and never has been, used symbolically to represent Australian aboriginal people exclusively. Not before British settlement, and not after. The kangaroo is actually quite independent of any of the cultural groups living in Australia for the most part... except when it's sitting in a roasting dish on our dinner tables that is.

The truth is, it's an Australian symbol, and Australia is not Germanic land.

[Menydh]

Ah, Bridie! Nice to see you around even if you come to visit through the back door!

Don't give it much thought to the issue of the kangaroo. It is just that some people here are concerned with animals welfare and see it as a cruelty that kangaroos maybe forced to parade at goose step.

[Carnyx]

Germanic Kangaroo, why not. Afterall every Australian comes out of a Germanic bush.

Quote = M.R.
"Australians do not have only English roots, since Australian can be anyone living in Australia from Abo to Anglo-Saxon to immigrant from Italy."

Who says so? You? Lucky for Australians that you are not an Australian leader then.

Yet, as it happens, there is just as much "we are all the same" pro-multicultural/pro-immigration/anti-nationalist/communist styled propaganda pushed here in Australia as there is in other first world countries, where many people from poorer nations endeavour to immigrate to, or seek refugee status within. It is the same in Germany, Sweden, Ireland, England, Scotland... and I would imagine, most likely the same in Slovenia too. (??) This is what nationalists fight against... but if you would like to jump on the propaganda bandwagon that seeks to destroy my ethnic group, my country and my nation then I have no choice but to consider you an enemy.


Quote = M.R.
"The truth is, it's an Australian symbol, and Australia is not Germanic land."

The truth is, you are not qualified to make such a statement. Australia became a CeltoGermanic land (not plain Germanic) the moment the British fleets arrived and claimed this land as part of the British Empire. Right or wrong, that's a fact of history. In its beginnings, Australia, as we know it today (or in your case, DON'T know it ) was created in the image of the UK - despite many obstacles. Mass immigration from nations other than the UK was not permitted until after the WW's... and its obvious to see why it was allowed to occur then. First they did away with the "British Australia" policy, then the White Australia policy (the latter of which came after the abolition of the British Australia policy in order to allow immigration from other European nations - to destroy Australia's relatively homogenous culture/society).


Quote = Mynydd
"Ah, Bridie! Nice to see you around even if you come to visit through the back door!"

Thanks Mynydd. I did try to log in again, but I forgot my old password. Then when I tried to get it re-sent to me, the email never came.

Quote = Mynydd
"Don't give it much thought to the issue of the kangaroo. It is just that some people here are concerned with animals welfare and see it as a cruelty that kangaroos maybe forced to parade at goose step. "

LOL Not much chance of that... we're too busy shooting them and eating them to make them parade for us.


Quote = Weggles
"Germanic Kangaroo, why not. Afterall every Australian comes out of a Germanic bush."
Only the blonde haired, blue eyed kangaroos are Germanic.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by BridieM

Thanks Mynydd. I did try to log in again, but I forgot my old password. Then when I tried to get it re-sent to me, the email never came.

I have disabled the mail system. I'll re-enable it soon. In the meantime, do check your mail.

Alternatively, you could have re-registered and then request a merging of your accounts.

LOL Not much chance of that... we're too busy shooting them and eating them to make them parade for us.

I don't eat anything that looks like a big hopping rat. But I know that their skin is highly appreciated for football goalkeepers gloves.

Only the blonde haired, blue eyed kangaroos are Germanic.

I guess that that leaves the Alpines out in the cold.

[Pirate]

Originally Posted by BridieM

Who says so? You? Lucky for Australians that you are not an Australian leader then.

Yet, as it happens, there is just as much "we are all the same" pro-multicultural/pro-immigration/anti-nationalist/communist styled propaganda pushed here in Australia as there is in other first world countries, where many people from poorer nations endeavour to immigrate to, or seek refugee status within. It is the same in Germany, Sweden, Ireland, England, Scotland... and I would imagine, most likely the same in Slovenia too. (??) This is what nationalists fight against...

Yes, but you're the same (Aborigines excluded) that you don't really have the right to claim that land and consider it yours. Which is your ethnic group and nation? Australians are neither nation nor ethnic group.

In that way it's not really the same thing as in Germany, Sweden, Ireland etc. Everyone can be a German citizen, but not everyone can be a German. But in Australia "Australian" can only be defined in terms of citizenship.

The truth is, you are not qualified to make such a statement. Australia became a CeltoGermanic land (not plain Germanic) the moment the British fleets arrived and claimed this land as part of the British Empire.

Even though they had no basis on which they could claim this land as part of this empire, but they did that anyway in an imperialistic and cruel fashion, just like they did it elsewhere. It's anti-nationalistic in it's concept, since we here have a position that every nation or ethnic group should have it's freedom and independance.

In a same way, someone could say in 50 years that Germany became Turkish the moment the Turkish immigrants became the majority there (suppose this happens).

Right or wrong, that's a fact of history. In its beginnings, Australia, as we know it today (or in your case, DON'T know it ) was created in the image of the UK - despite many obstacles. Mass immigration from nations other than the UK was not permitted until after the WW's... and its obvious to see why it was allowed to occur then.

Yes, but it was created by immigrants. Opposing immigration in your case is complete nonsense and contradictory, since today's immigrants come to Australia in a same way your ancestors came years ago.

First they did away with the "British Australia" policy, then the White Australia policy (the latter of which came after the abolition of the British Australia policy in order to allow immigration from other European nations - to destroy Australia's relatively homogenous culture/society).

This homogenous culture was already destroyed the same moment British ships arrived.

[OneEnglishNorman]

Originally Posted by BridieM

Kangaroo = Australia, Australia = Germanics (because official language is Germanic and because people who spoke that language massacred original population), therefore kangaroo = Germanic.

The original population is still there...

Are wild boar Turkish because Turks live in Germany?

Kangaroos are not Germanic. King Canute didn't breed kangaroos and walk around with one on the end of a leash.

[Pirate]

Originally Posted by OneEnglishNorman

The original population is still there...

Are wild boar Turkish because Turks live in Germany?

Kangaroos are not Germanic. King Canute didn't breed kangaroos and walk around with one on the end of a leash.

He didn't said that, he quoted me.

[Phlegethon]

Traditional Germanic sport:

[Menydh]

@Bridie:

Originally Posted by Mynydd

I have disabled the mail system. I'll re-enable it soon. In the meantime, do check your mail.

Your email is not working:

This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification

Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:

[youremail@]

Technical details of permanent failure:
PERM_FAILURE: SMTP Error (state 13): 550 #5.1.0 Address rejected [youremail@]

@ OEN - Don't be such a Bruenn. *rolls eyes* As M.R. said....

"He didn't said that, he quoted me."

(BTW M.R, I'm actually a woman and so I find it very insulting that you would degrade me to the position of being a man... this would automatically reduce my IQ by at least 50%, and I simply CANNOT afford to lose that much intellectual ability. )


Quote=M.R.
"Yes, but you're the same (Aborigines excluded) that you don't really have the right to claim that land and consider it yours."

Actually, if you look at the history of mankind from the view point of current, popular theories of evolution, you will find that human migration, colonisation, expansion and fierce competition for land (for purposes of habitation, farming and hunting grounds) has been a constant feature. Human populations are dynamic, and this includes their environments, as well as their physiology and psychology. It's a fact of life that stronger, more evolved populations in the past would win the battle of survival of the fittest and claim new territories as their own from other populations, and these conquered populations were often exploited. This is has been happening since man left Africa.

Whether its right or wrong is a concern for the present... shall we live in the past and continue such migratory patterns (conquer and exploit), or shall we evolve past such barbarism? Whatever the answer, no one can turn back the years and put the all population groups back to as they were 1000's of years ago... nor 100's of years ago. All we can deal with now is the present. And my present reality is that my ancestors conquered this land a couple of hundred years ago or so, and now it's my home. It's too late to undo the past. That battle was over long ago. The aboriginals lost and now they rely on Australians to help them survive in the modern world... because you can be as sure as hell, they would not survive with any degree of modern comfort or security if they did not have us to rely on. They would no doubt be reduced to the level of civilisation of Papua New Guineans... and none of them want that, as is evident by their attempts to claim special hand-outs at every turn. As it is, the Papua New Guineans have benefited over the years from financial aid and free medical treatments/aid from Australia.


Quote=MR
"Which is your ethnic group and nation? Australians are neither nation nor ethnic group."

I am an ethnic nationalist. My ethnic group is English, my nation is England and my region is Australia.


Quote=MR
"In that way it's not really the same thing as in Germany, Sweden, Ireland etc. Everyone can be a German citizen, but not everyone can be a German. But in Australia "Australian" can only be defined in terms of citizenship."

Wrong. Only those who hail from the countries which originally established and built Australia from the ground up can be Australian, ie, those from the British Isles.

This is how the immigrants in this country see it too (whether they be 1st generation, 2nd generation etc etc)... eg, ask an Italian living in Australia to identify himself and he will usually tell you that he is and Italian living in Australia. Ask someone with Brit Isles ancestry to identify themselves they will usually tell you they are just Australian.

Do you recall anything about the "Cronulla race riots" in Australia a while back? Lebanese Muslims (mostly 3rd, 4th etc generation) living in Australia v's Australians? Those Lebanese would be insulted and outraged if you were to call them Australian. As would most "ethnic" types (meaning non-Brit Isles ancestry) who live in Australia. And when these Lebansese yelled insults at the Australians, it was automatically known to all living in Australia that they were referring to "Anglo-Celtics" only.

So what you believe about "Australians" is merely a figment of some Slovenian's over-active imagination.


Quote=MR
"Even though they had no basis on which they could claim this land as part of this empire, but they did that anyway in an imperialistic and cruel fashion, just like they did it elsewhere."

That is correct. Doesn't alter the present however.


Quote=MR
"It's anti-nationalistic in it's concept, since we here have a position that every nation or ethnic group should have it's freedom and independance."

Awww... isn't that a cosy concept... "every nation or ethnic group" (excluding the descendants of the colonials, of course ) "should have it's freedom and independence". Well, I agree. In an ideal world they should.... Hey, I'm a woman! Naturally, I long for social harmony, fairies in my garden, water sprites in my fish pond and other such fanciful niceties! But this isn't the harsh reality of the world. Humans ARE ALWAYS in competition with others, whether that be on an individual basis or a national basis, and nothing will EVER change this. No "this is the way it should have always been" will ever resolve the competition - one must fight for their share, or they will end up with none.

Nevertheless, whether or not the descendants of Empire builders have the right to life is not up for discussion as far as I'm concerned.


Quote=MR
"In a same way, someone could say in 50 years that Germany became Turkish the moment the Turkish immigrants became the majority there (suppose this happens)."

Not "could" say it, they WILL say it if the Germans don't fight (and win) against the Turkish invasion. The Turks are trying to expand their territory and if they succeed, they WILL BE ABLE to claim Germany is anything they wish.


Quote=MR
"Yes, but it was created by immigrants. Opposing immigration in your case is complete nonsense and contradictory, since today's immigrants come to Australia in a same way your ancestors came years ago."

It was created by immigrants from the Brit Isles. That is key. The English were expanding their territory - so it was, and still is (for now), English territory. I'm not sure for how much longer though...

[Pirate]

Originally Posted by BridieM

Actually, if you look at the history of mankind from the view point of current, popular theories of evolution, you will find that human migration, colonisation, expansion and fierce competition for land (for purposes of habitation, farming and hunting grounds) has been a constant feature. Human populations are dynamic, and this includes their environments, as well as their physiology and psychology. It's a fact of life that stronger, more evolved populations in the past would win the battle of survival of the fittest and claim new territories as their own from other populations, and these conquered populations were often exploited. This is has been happening since man left Africa. Whether its right or wrong is a concern for the present... shall we live in the past and continue such migratory patterns (conquer and exploit), or shall we evolve past such barbarism? Whatever the answer, no one can turn back the years and put the all population groups back to as they were 1000's of years ago... nor 100's of years ago. All we can deal with now is the present. And my present reality is that my ancestors conquered this land a couple of hundred years ago or so, and now it's my home. It's too late to undo the past. That battle was over long ago.

Ah this argument again... True in some way, however it's impossible to compare the ethicities/nations in Europe and their relationships with their homelands with this. This nations evolved from a very long and complex process trough ethnogenesis which can't simply be constructed in a land where some people from miles away simply came and conquered and then constructed some kind of identity and called that land their own.

The aboriginals lost and now they rely on Australians to help them survive in the modern world...

The modern world... They would be much better in their own world, even if it's "primitive" and "barbaric" by some stupid "western" standards. I have much more respect for that world than degenerated and twisted modern world of colonials.

because you can be as sure as hell, they would not survive with any degree of modern comfort or security if they did not have us to rely on. They would no doubt be reduced to the level of civilisation of Papua New Guineans...

And which level is that? So just because that you are on civilization level 34 and they on level 6, they somehow live a miserable life, I see. You do however know that, unlike us, they at least can't fear that their culture and way of life won't be preserved, will we here have a long fight ahead of us if we want to preserve just that. No matter how more civilized our civilization is.

I am an ethnic nationalist. My ethnic group is English, my nation is England and my region is Australia.

If you're English, you're country is England and your region.. well whatever region in England you live.

As for you being English, it's being discussed here several times I think, how much some (I don't know which in your case) generation of colonials or emmigrants can really consider themselves as being of that particular identity, no matter what their ancestry is.

Wrong. Only those who hail from the countries which originally established and built Australia from the ground up can be Australian, ie, those from the British Isles.

This is of course debatable, even by your definition Australian is still multi-cultural and multi-ethnic term.

That is correct. Doesn't alter the present however.

We're the grandchildren of our grandparents.

"It's anti-nationalistic in it's concept, since we here have a position that every nation or ethnic group should have it's freedom and independance."

Awww... isn't that a cosy concept... "every nation or ethnic group" (excluding the descendants of the colonials, of course )

You're not ethnic group.

"should have it's freedom and independence". Well, I agree. In an ideal world they should.... Hey, I'm a woman! Naturally, I long for social harmony, fairies in my garden, water sprites in my fish pond and other such fanciful niceties! But this isn't the harsh reality of the world. Humans ARE ALWAYS in competition with others, whether that be on an individual basis or a national basis, and nothing will EVER change this. No "this is the way it should have always been" will ever resolve the competition - one must fight for their share, or they will end up with none.

I'm idealist. As is nationalism in it's spirit. Accept harsh reality and you'll never have anything better than harsh reality.

Nevertheless, whether or not the descendants of Empire builders have the right to life is not up for discussion as far as I'm concerned.

Wow, I neve