>>507614292
>I'm just trying to jot it down into the usual shill categories. So which is it? Anti-pagan? Anti-NatSoc? Is one European worse than the other cuz muh reasons? Which is it?
>Anti-pagan
yes, none of the founding members or subsequent members of my race were pagans
>Anti-Natsoc
yes, because your idea of race is wrong. Race is shared heritage by descendance from ethnohistoric actors in an attestable ethnohistoric genesis event. Literally anything else than descendance from French settlers established between 1605 and 1754 here I couldn't give less of a shit about, because as far as ethnogeneses go this is it for my race.
Beside, NatSoc is just another extant bastard spawn of the French Revolution.
>You could've made a thread hating on kikes, who flood your nations with violent invaders, push degeneracy, and corrupt your society and leaders.
I do. all of those are symptoms of either racial abandonment, which encourage all form of corruption and antinatalism, or the worship of genetic caracteristics. Genetics are probabilities, they serve better as tools to confirm descendance by genealogy, the old reliable, than they do in somehow calculating the percentage of "whiteness" a person is and arbitrarily declare that such percentage below X is white.
>But no, you oh-so-righteous racial nationalist decided to make a thread targeting, ummm.. lemme see... oh! Other racial nationalists of your same race.
you're no racial nationalists. That's my point. You're race fabulists, grifters selling people an erroneous race as both an absent exemple - as nothing but genetic medians exist as your nebulous standards - and yet another false idol.
>Wow. Great job bub, surely we will win; In-fighting is our greatest strength after all.
You wish the death of my people in that "White" false gestalt just like Jews want the death of my people in the "Human™" gestalt. I don't recognize both as solid nor desiable identities.
