EuroCup 2024 Squads

[Tooting Carmen]

Everything that was organic and reasonable for thousand of years, I cannot put a direct number to it, i'm not a immigration expert.
Thinking there can be a realistic government with 0% influx of foreigners is silly, you maybe can achieve it by being a 2nd north korea, not sure if thats something id like for Germany.

The priority and realistic approach to the German demographic crisis outside the birthrate issue, is too stop the pull factors like access to our welfare system without german citizenship and also make it way harder to get a German citizenship.

Our old Chancellor Helmut Kohl and now AfD have a so called "remigration" proposal that would also benefit non German with financial support to voluntarily go back home and start a new business in their native homelands.

We will never forcefully get rid of all non-ethnic germans, thats utopic and not worth discussing and we wont be able and shouldnt even thrive for it, to not let anyone that is not a German in. We can discuss this maybe with populations that are not European or from the developed world in General.

I understand all this. But what I am getting at is the notion that "European immigrants are always good, regardless of how many come in or how they behave" is ludicrous and dubious itself. While it may be argued that a provincial English town which within just a few years becomes 20% Polish is less 'shocking' than a town that becomes 20% Jamaican or Pakistani within a few years, this doesn't mean that the locals won't still find it disorienting and disconcerting to some extent.

But regarding German citizenship: I thought it is mostly based on jus sanguinis and not jus solis already?

[Teutone]

I understand all this. But what I am getting at is the notion that "European immigrants are always good, regardless of how many come in or how they behave" is ludicrous and dubious itself. While it may be argued that a provincial English town which within just a few years becomes 20% Polish is less 'shocking' than a town that becomes 20% Jamaican or Pakistani within a few years, this doesn't mean that the locals won't still find it disorienting and disconcerting to some extent.

But regarding German citizenship: I thought it is mostly based on jus sanguinis and not jus solis already?

Mass immigration is never good and only causes Issues, there were even tensions and issues with inner German mass immigration from our lost territories.
When my Grandfather had to flee from Prussia to West Germany he was lucky to be a male as there were shortages of them and he was able to work, but for alot of female refugees with kids without a husband there were huge conflicts. Wherever alot of people move to a place, there will be a higher demand for services, living space and jobs, this will always result in conflict and thats why even out of a non ethnocentric perspective a sane person should always be against mass immigration.

And there was a recent reform of the german citizenship right, it will do alot of damage.

https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-...ip-law-2254382

[Tooting Carmen]

Mass immigration is never good and only causes Issues, there were even tensions and issues with inner German mass immigration from our lost territories.
When my Grandfather had to flee from Prussia to West Germany he was lucky to be a male as there were shortages of them and he was able to work, but for alot of female refugees with kids without a husband there were huge conflicts. Wherever alot of people move to a place, there will be a higher demand for services, living space and jobs, this will always result in conflict and thats why even out of a non ethnocentric perspective a sane person should always be against mass immigration.

And there was a recent reform of the german citizenship right, it will do alot of damage.

https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-...ip-law-2254382

I can understand all this. But going out on a limb here, I also think there is a difference between a genuinely cosmopolitan society where you can find small numbers of people from lots of ethnic groups and nations, which is what happens in several Inner London boroughs in particular, and by contrast vast ghettoes or even towns populated by loads of immigrants and their descendants from specific nations or ethnic groups, e.g. Bradford with Pakistanis, or indeed Boston with Poles.

[Teutone]

I can understand all this. But going out on a limb here, I also think there is a difference between a genuinely cosmopolitan society where you can find small numbers of people from lots of ethnic groups and nations, which is what happens in several Inner London boroughs in particular, and by contrast vast ghettoes or even towns populated by loads of immigrants and their descendants from specific nations or ethnic groups, e.g. Bradford with Pakistanis, or indeed Boston with Poles.

Something subjective a person like you and others from a mixed backround will never understand, is a feeling that is simply good and cannot be further described if you are in a community and town and you walk around and all the people resemble you more or less, that adds to the quality of life. When im in the city centre of Düsseldorf and feel like in Maghreb there is a general feeling of discomfort I dont have when I am around other Germans.

As people that resemble you most likely also share the same code of conduct, views, morality and sense of honor with you, this what creates high trust societies.
I am not aware of any cosmopolitan society that can be considered a high trust society.

Iceland is a high trust society, a society where Police officers dont even have to carry guns and many dont have to lock their front doors, that is the result of a ethnic homogenous high IQ society, Germany used to be like that and is shifting away from it further and further. That UK cops dont carry guns, is insane given the violent crime and homicide rate, in Iceland it makes sense on the other hand.

[Tooting Carmen]

Something subjective a person like you and others from a mixed backround will never understand, is a feeling that is simply good and cannot be further described if you are in a community and town and you walk around and all the people resemble you more or less, that adds to the quality of life. When im in the city centre of Düsseldorf and feel like in Maghreb there is a general feeling of discomfort I dont have when I am around other Germans.

As people that resemble you most likely also share the same code of conduct, views, morality and sense of honor with you, this what creates high trust societies.
I am not aware of any cosmopolitan society that can be considered a high trust society.

Iceland is a high trust society, a society where Police officers dont even have to carry guns and many dont have to lock their front doors, that is the result of a ethnic homogenous high IQ society, Germany used to be like that and is shifting away from it further and further. That UK cops dont carry guns, is insane given the violent crime and homicide rate, in Iceland it makes sense on the other hand.

I don't mean to go off on a tangent, but I thought most MENAs in Germany were Turks and latterly Syrians, Iraqis, Iranians and Afghans, not NAs? Otherwise, I agree about the link between ethnic homogeneity and high trust, although some do defy that: New Zealand, Canada and even arguably the US itself. Many Gulf Arab countries and Singapore also have incredibly high percentages of immigrants (e.g. only around 20% of Dubai residents are native Emiratis), yet have relatively low levels of crime and corruption.

[rothaer]

West Germans mixed with celts, East Germans with Baltics and Slavs, South Germans with balkans-slavs and italian populations.

This almost includes every broad European ethnicities that I am aware of.

What defines a ethnic German is a origin that can and mostly does include partly not Germanic ancestry with Germanic ancestry while being part of the German language and cultural area.

First and foremost I am a German and ethnocentric but I am also a European and prefer generally any European population over any non European population, also a completely normal stance a Mosley, Venner, DeGrelle and Ernst Jünger agreed on.

Region, Country, Europa.

I can agree to all that is stated here.

Just a comment on your sequence "region, country, Europe" as it could make the impression to be a logical homogenous cline.

The actual reproduction community (Fortpflanzungsgemeinschaft), which can be seen as the biological form in which we do exist - and theoretically do have an eternal life even - is less knitted to a region or Europe but to a people / ethnicity. I guess this is what corresponds to "country" in your sheme. It's not by chance that this - the ethnicity - is also the entity that the Volkskörper refers to. In fact, to speak the same language is what promotes exchange and vice versa, to be a common reproduction community has made all members speak the same language. This said, I wanted to motivate why the entity "country" (essentially corresponding to ethnicity) in your sequence has more weight than "region" and "Europe".

Spoiler!

How could objectively be enlightened what entity - region, ethnicity, Europe - has what relevance?

I think that the distribution of the ancestry of people shows the extent of the reproduction community in the past. I actually currently happen to play with depicting ancestral places from pedrigrees where the testee can be assumend to ultimately hail from (the local population). And I thought it could be fun to show here.

First I show a pre 1945 ethnicity and language map from central Europe to give those readers an overview that are not familiar with the conditions in question:



Now, my ancestry is from these places (I added the borders of interwar Poland - thanks Peterski - which at the same time make the Eastern German borders visible that are essentially in line with the ethnic borders):



My wife’s ancestry is from here, which suggests more a regional reproduction community only. That are actually 64 different places, so this concentration is not due to a lack of knowledge.



Here are the ancestral places of my first wife:



Here are the ancestral places of my brother-in-law’s wife:



And here are the ancestral places of a friend of mine that we depicted yesterday:

[Teutone]

I can agree to all stated here.

Just a comment on your sequence "region, country, Europe" as it could make the impression to be a logical homogenous cline.

The actual reproduction community (Fortpflanzungsgemeinschaft), which can be seen as the biological form in which we do exist - and theoretically do have an eternal life even - is less knitted to a region or Europe but to a people / ethnicity. I guess this is what corresponds to "country" in your sheme. It's not by chance that this - the ethnicity - is also the entity that the Volkskörper refers to. In fact, to speak the same language is what promotes exchange and vice versa, to be a common reproduction community has made all members speak the same language. This said, I wanted to motivate why the entity "country" (essentially corresponding to ethnicity) in your sequence has more weight than "region" and "Europe".

Spoiler!

How could objectively be enlightened what entity - region, ethnicity, Europe - has what relevance?

I think that the distribution of the ancestry of people shows the extent of the reproduction community in the past. I actually currently happen to play with depicting ancestral places from pedrigrees where the testee can be assumend to ultimately hail from (the local population). And I thought it could be fun to show here.

First I show a pre 1945 ethnicity and language map from central Europe to give those readers an overview that are not familiar with the conditions in question:



Now, my ancestry is from these places (I added the borders of interwar Poland - thanks Peterski - which at the same time make the Eastern German borders visible that are essentially in line with the ethnic borders):



My wife’s ancestry is from here, which suggests more a regional reproduction community only. That are actually 64 different places, so this concentration is not due to a lack of knowledge.



Here are the ancestral places of my first wife:



Here are the ancestral places of my brother-in-law’s wife:



And here are the ancestral places of a friend of mine that we depicted yesterday:

If I understand you correctly, you try to show me that all your ancestors and extended family originate from the pre 1945 ethnic german land not the same region, but in the past that only could be caused by inner german transmigration. Wouldn't the Fortpflanzungsgemeinschaft be also a logical result of a historical reality of a community based society, originating and living in joint families not just the nuclear family in which it was almost always predetermined that your partner will also be from a area of close proximity if we exclude inner German transmigration and logically cannot be too foreign genetically, linguistically and culturally.

All these parameters secured a Fortpflanzungsgemeinschaft without any ideology that had to be implemented, cause the Fortpflanzungsgemeinschaft was a result of Ortsgebundenheit(locality?) and linguistic/cultural proximity.

But do these factors still apply today? No. Technology, individualism and modern definition of states,cultures and families will lead to a increasing number of people that will find partners that will not have origins of close proximity or origins from the same cultural/linguistic background, therefore we can define a more broader definition of what people can be considered to be part of the Volkskörper and argue logically were we draw that line, I personally draw that line if a person has germanic ancestry and ancestry of another european population plus the person is culturally German. Where would you realistically draw a line? Or how would you try to educate society of what choice of partner is good or damaging?

I don't mean to go off on a tangent, but I thought most MENAs in Germany were Turks and latterly Syrians, Iraqis, Iranians and Afghans, not NAs? Otherwise, I agree about the link between ethnic homogeneity and high trust, although some do defy that: New Zealand, Canada and even arguably the US itself. Many Gulf Arab countries and Singapore also have incredibly high percentages of immigrants (e.g. only around 20% of Dubai residents are native Emiratis), yet have relatively low levels of crime and corruption.

Düsseldorf and Frankfurt have a very prominent Maghreb community.

The Gulf Arab states are still very authoritarian and restrictive to keep up order I image Singapore isnt too different.

Canada and the USA become increasingly less safe with ongoing shift away from a white majority.

[rothaer]

If I understand you correctly, you try to show me that all your ancestors and extended family originate from the pre 1945 ethnic german land not the same region, but in the past that only could be caused by inner german transmigration.

Yes.

I wanted to show that most - not all - of the intermarriage occured within the same ethnicity and that these marriage circles mostly were bigger than regions and smaller than Europe. As for „extended family“: All five testees shown are genealogically unrelated to each other.

Wouldn't the Fortpflanzungsgemeinschaft be also a logical result of a historical reality of a community based society, originating and living in joint families not just the nuclear family in which it was almost always predetermined that your partner will also be from a area of close proximity if we exclude inner German transmigration and logically cannot be too foreign genetically, linguistically and culturally.

Yes, it could have been. But the actual extent of the Fortplanzungsgemeinschaft is seemingly wider than that. Both to my perception and the five genealogically unrelated to each other presented testees.

All these parameters secured a Fortpflanzungsgemeinschaft without any ideology that had to be implemented, cause the Fortpflanzungsgemeinschaft was a result of Ortsgebundenheit(locality?) and linguistic/cultural proximity.

Yes, in theory. But again, the reproduction community also in earlier times was notably wider than that, which is also indicated by the geographical extent of a language. If the reproduction community would have been as restricted as you give as an example we would have had 5,000 different languages in Germany like you have on Papua-New Guinea.

But do these factors still apply today? No. Technology, individualism and modern definition of states,cultures and families will lead to a increasing number of people that will find partners that will not have origins of close proximity or origins from the same cultural/linguistic background, therefore we can define a more broader definition of what people can be considered to be part of the Volkskörper and argue logically were we draw that line,

We are now at a crucial point.

With that approach you could also say, if we continue our carelessness - care for that was in earlier times not much needed - we will die out in 50 years, that would be the respective suitable behaviour.

I have an other approach. I refer to the past because this is what defines my identity. For logical reasons only the past and not the future can determine my identity. Because I already have an identity. And my identity (as a German, as a member of the German people in its hitherto sense) is not dependent on any future event.

The next thing is that I want to have my identity continued into the future like it was in the past. I think that this is a very natural and legit strive for every living being on this planet.

This means that coming hardships are no reason to change one’s aim and now change one’s identity as a kind of surrender to the hardships.

If the German people was able to murder 6 million Jews this gives me confidence that we will also be able to wake up and in order to survive with determination and thoroughness push back 15 or 20 million foreign intruders. It’s a much smaller task than killing 6 million and it’s very legit. In fact, struggling for one’s own existence is the most legit action thinkable.

I personally draw that line if a person has germanic ancestry and ancestry of another european population plus the person is culturally German.

My loyalty is defined by my people (and that is the German people). I consider it logically incompatible with that loyalty to treat different ancestries of unconditional compatriots differently. I have no special relation to Germanic, Slavic, Celtic, Baltic, Roman except for the factual aspect of the different sizes of their contributions to the German people. The only special relation that I do have is that our to be cared for German langauge is a Germanic langauge. But no ethnicity can care for more than one language and other ethnicities than the German will have to care for our other ancestral langauges. However, this said, I see no reason to treat a Germanic ancestry different than other ancestries of Germans.

Where would you realistically draw a line?

In brief: I’d have three categories. Germans (G), non-Germans acceptable for residence in Germany (nGa) and non-Germans not acceptable for residence in Germany(nGna).

As a rough rule G are those that have 4 grandparents commonly considered ethnic Germans.

More exact, the huge differences among the non-Germans must be taken into account and matter. The more alien someone is the smaller ist the ancestry proportion that is compatible with being German. If I’m not mistaken, this is also something that you do emphasise. I’d sort all non-Germans into 7 degrees of distance. And then define what are the maximum proportions of them being compatible with being German. I wrote this up when I was 19 and I was already asked here to tell the exact rules and I already agreed to look it up and tell it in detail at some time. I’ll have to do that soon. For giving an approximate orientation I’d say that ¼ of Czech ancestry could be compatible with being German, while ¼ of Polish ancestry I’d view debateable.

The nGa would be a very small group of almost-Germans, i. e. essentially people that would have German per definietion children in the next generation if they would breed with a German. You could view them as potential parents of Germans.

All other non-Germans are then nGna.

Or how would you try to educate society of what choice of partner is good or damaging?

The aim is simple. Germans shall have German partners. And considering that we are the second biggest people in Europe no compatriot can be heard with an excuse that he or she doesn’t find something suitable.

How would I try to educate the society for promoting that aim?

I’d be very aware of what destroyed this natural strive and that is the loss of national/ethnic pride. I actually see the performed holocaust remembrance as a notable contributor to the loss of pride. I’d much promote that pride by teaching various positive things and nice performances of our people and I think that if the normal pride has recovered all other things will work automatically in the wished for direction. I’d also teach the banality that you can only continue your people and your ancestors if you breed your own kind. I’d re-introduce the Mutterkreuz as an award for having 5 or more German children. I’d cut the social support for childless older Germans with the intent that all shall see that children lack and what are the consequences. Their omissions should not be compensated by forein care personnel.

[Blondie]

I do not fetisize nazis i use them as tool for my own thing and dont give a fuck but you are a bi sexual race mixer who acts very racist and that is self hating

At last time when i checked my boyfriend he was white

[Sovanz]

At last time when i checked my boyfriend he was white

You never had brown/colored men libidio?