We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children
Sure. Their primary concern is that it lends legitimacy to the claim that white people will cease to exist and white children are in danger. I wouldn't agree with that if it were 1978. White people as a racial construct are not going to simply die out, that's not really a thing. However, there is rampant, systemic, anti-white discrimination at this point that endangers white kids and teaches them to hate themselves.
The saying itself is not much of a problem. All the other crazy shit before and after it is, and more specifically, the idea that the best way to protect white people is with socialism; well that's a special case of retard.
Socialism didn't protect Russia, Germany, or Britain. Imagine being fucking retarded enough to think that therefore Socialism would protect white people, when Socialism is actively destroying white people right now.
Sure. Their primary concern is that it lends legitimacy to the claim...
Frankly, fuck their concerns. I'm not going to for a single minute take the arguments of people who absolutely despise "whiteness" when it comes to whether or not white people should look after themselves. It's a bit of a conflict of interests, I'd say.
It's like the people who take every single instance of anything as proof that climate change is real, and they should push the agendas they already wanted to push. Or the disarmament squad, who will take any event as a sign they need to push the gun control legislation they already wanted to push.
They're not reliable or trustworthy, so frankly their concerns when it comes to white people is beyond worthless.
...the claim that white people will cease to exist and white children are in danger...White people as a racial construct are not going to simply die out, that's not really a thing.
I mean, I would have thought so too. Until you notice what they're doing to any and every "white majority" country (and I put that in quotes because they don't call black countries "black majority," or Asian countries "Asian majority," and the whole concept is a linguistic attack itself.) It's not going to be soon, but if white people aren't allowed to have anything for themselves, and any group of predominately or exclusively white people is deemed racist...over time, yes, "white people" will absolutely die out, or at least shrivel away to nothing. and once the numbers get low enough, probably get genocided actively even nearer to extinction. You just have to look at the trends to realize that, yes, white people are being shoved out, and that will at least potentially result in eventual near extinction.
However, there is rampant, systemic, anti-white discrimination at this point that endangers white kids and teaches them to hate themselves.
And, if white people aren't allowed to have an identity, but every other racial group is, and they're mostly trained to hate white people...yeah, whites aren't faring too well in that scenario.
The saying itself is not much of a problem.
Tell them that.
All the other crazy shit before and after it is, and more specifically, the idea that the best way to protect white people is with socialism; well that's a special case of retard.
Awwww shit, there you go again. One of my least favorite arguments. If you care about white people, you're a socialist and a leftist. Tiresome.
Socialism didn't protect Russia, Germany, or Britain. Imagine being fucking retarded enough to think that therefore Socialism would protect white people, when Socialism is actively destroying white people right now.
No one is calling for socialism. You just use that as a smear against people you don't like, to try to score cheap points. It's a shame, too. You're obviously a smart guy, and you're good on plenty of subjects. But this is just bullshit, and it annoys me every time you, and others using the same playbook, use that tactic.
If defending white people is socialism, what should white people do? Because you seem to just lump anything pro-white in with Nazism, and Nazism in with socialism (yeah, point, but it's a tad more complicated), and then with leftism. So basically, to you, any pro-white movement is inherently leftist, and thus inherently retarded. So do white people just die out, or what?
I'm a white person who cares about white people, and thinks they're under attack. What is an acceptable attitude or response?
Just go die in the woods alone like a freedom loving rugged individual bruh
Still a more respectful answer than leftists would give, so that's something, I suppose.
It really is absurd that 'just let white people die out on their own' is a compassionate take when grading on a bell curve, where leftists are involved.
Pretty sure letting white people go off and die in the woods in freedom is far-right white supremacy nowadays. Yikes.
It's not going to be soon, but if white people aren't allowed to have anything for themselves, and any group of predominately or exclusively white people is deemed racist...over time, yes, "white people" will absolutely die out, or at least shrivel away to nothing.
No, this is Progressive Nationalist doctrine. Even in the worst case you can politically imagine, stateless peoples exist regardless of political recognition. That isn't even remotely going to come to that.
One of my least favorite arguments. If you care about white people, you're a socialist and a leftist.
No, just the opposite. If your are a Leftist or a Socialist, then I know for a fact you don't care about American Whites. The same way a Feminist doesn't care about women, or a BLM activist doesn't care about American Blacks.
I'm a white person who cares about white people, and thinks they're under attack. What is an acceptable attitude or response?
Open and immediate confrontation against racialist bullshit. That's what I've done, even at work, directly to people's faces. I make it clear that under no uncertain terms I will respond to racialism with direct, open, immediate hostility and condemnation regardless of consequence. I will not tolerate it, and will not tolerate it being pushed onto my co-workers, nor any member of my team.
You don't tolerate it, you don't compromise, you set the tempo of the battle and you start it early. "But you could lose your job!" Good. Don't work for racist, Nazi, trash. If you are a good employee, then they don't deserve you, and better people should earn your labor.
And yes, that includes these fucking Black National Socialist terrorists talking about "racial equity" and "social justice".
Beyond that, take care of your neighbors, family, friends, and local community. Be the pillar of your community. If you really want to effect positive change for American Whites, then you need to check out what Booker T. Washington did for American Blacks.
And, again, I'm not trying to be mean, I don't dislike or disrespect you. I know you're a smart guy. I just thing you're on the wrong side of this, and disingenuous on this topic as well.
Even in the worst case you can politically imagine, stateless peoples exist regardless of political recognition. That isn't even remotely going to come to that.
Stateless people exist...but not as any sort of power. Stateless people exist...at the mercy of the State.
Again, they're after white people, in every white location. I know you know this. Over time, that will result in white people fading out. In any nonwhite location, whites are the outsiders. In any white location...well, our own governments are turning against us steadily, we have affirmative action against us, we often have all but "No Whites Allowed" signs. If the trend continues, that doesn't leave us anywhere at all pleasant.
US went from +90% white to ~60% in around a century. Many other "white majority" (again, linguistic attack on white countries, no one else is a "majority" country, they're just an Asian or black country, or whatever) followed the same trend. All power structures are against whites. There is no pro-white group with power really anywhere in the world. Almost any country that went from majority white to minority white basically genocided the white people there.
To act like it's impossible that whites get driven to utter irrelevance and put to the mercy of people who have declared their hatred of us means you're either not paying attention (which I know isn't true), or just don't want to admit it.
If your are a Leftist or a Socialist, then I know for a fact you don't care about American Whites.
Again, linguistics. You accuse anyone who says they're for white people of being socialist leftists. So it doesn't matter who you say cares about white people and who doesn't, when you label anyone who says they care about white people as people who by definition can't care about white people. Nope.
I honestly believe something broke him 2 months ago, what that is or was I dunno, but he spurted gibberish which was removed and never answer my query about it.
None of this is a word salad, I'm being as explicitly clear as is possible.
Stateless people exist...but not as any sort of power. Stateless people exist...at the mercy of the State.
None of this has ever been true. Even when people are within empires, power still exists without being an ethno-state. If it weren't true, Poland wouldn't exist, and we'd still be talking about the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Ethno-states are typically the exception in history. A people can have power even without the states to do so.
Actually, I just thought of a good example!
Jews.
They didn't even have a state for over a thousand years.
Over time, that will result in white people fading out.
Again, not even in the worst case scenario, and I don't think the worst case will come to pass.
There is no pro-white group with power really anywhere in the world.
That's because the concept of "white racial solidarity" is an anathema to white people. Even the Nazis weren't Pro-White. They were Pro-German. The are only two groups that were ever really "pro-white". The British Anglos, and the Southern Scoth-Irish & Anglo former Whigs. Even then, those people used two different definitions. The British Anglos referring primarily to the Peoples of Great Britain; and the American Southerner Whigs referring to non-Blacks & non-Orientals. The Brits are, frankly, a mess because of the conflict between the old definition and the American definition; and the Americans south abandoned white racialism because it didn't do shit to help them.
To act like it's impossible that whites get driven to utter irrelevance and put to the mercy of people who have declared their hatred of us
Whomever told you that white people could be driven to irrelevance or vassalized forgot they landed on the moon.
No, seriously, being stateless does not mean being without power or influence in a society. "The only legitimate method for political power is a government job" is simply not understanding history, or operating off of a Leftist dialectic on power.
You accuse anyone who says they're for white people of being socialist leftists.
You're just refusing to listen. I accuse Socialists of being Socialists. Being pro-white is not even definitive of an ideology. The issue is that people assume that National Socialists have a monopoly on that claim. They don't. They are race traitors 100% of the time because they will always sacrifice their own clientele class for power.
The people who like to call people NAZI and the people who wish to be NAZI are similar in neither group actually know about NAZIs politically speaking.
Fascism is the practical application of Socialism.
National Socialism is the practical application of Race Communism.
The more the Leftist tries to make his ideals work, the more he becomes a Fascist or a National Socialist. This is because if he tries to hold to his raw principles (like Bolshevism or Anarcho-Communism) the either dies or immediately kills the guy standing next to him. His ideology is so blood-thirsty and psychotic that it can only work when he off-loads his blood-thirsty psychosis to the state to manage for him. Hence, why it is practical.
Fascism is the practical application of Socialism.
I'm not a fascist myself (actually a bit of a lolbertarian, insert laughter here), but that's a massive oversimplification. You people love to say fascism is socialism is leftism, to try to discredit people you call Nazis. Ironically, a leftist tactic itself. Your argument is literally the leftist argument of calling anyone a Nazi, but you just extrapolate to then say that all Nazis are leftists, because that's a more damaging attack to the targets you use it on.
I could go into detail how fascism isn't (always) socialism or leftism, but that isn't really the point. I started to, but then deleted it. Point is, your argument amounts to calling people you disagree with leftists, while passing through Nazism first, as mentioned above. It doesn't really matter if fascism is socialism or not; it's a disingenuous attack, unless used against people who explicitly wear the Nazi label. And even then, you have to back it up a bit, or you're just calling people leftists, just like the left calls everyone Nazis.
Being pro-white does not mean you're a Nazi, and being Nazi does not mean you're a leftist.
Being pro-white, as a white person, is good. That has nothing to do with Nazism, socialism, or leftism.
I'm white. I like white people. More importantly, I stand by the right to say that, from a freedom perspective. I'm not a Nazi. I'm not a socialist. I'm not a leftist. I am pro-white, though.
Fascism is Socialism explicitly, by it's own terminology. It just happens to be a very specific variant of Socialism which can be summarized to: Italian State Syndicalism.
Fascism is Socialism. There is no mechanism which allows it to not be Socialism. It literally can't be anything else. You can claim that "calling people you disagree with leftists" is simply not part of it. I disagree with Monarchism, but I've never called a Monarchist a Leftist, because Monarchism is not part of Leftism. Fascism is Leftism because it is Leftism. Disagreeing with me is irrelevant. Communism, Socialism, Fabian Socialism, Democratic Socialism, Social Democracy, Progressivism, Fascism, National Socialism, Anarcho-Syndicalism, Titoism, Maoism, Marxism, Marxist-Leninism, are all Leftist ideologies due to them ideologically stemming from Rousseau.
Furthermore, I'm not going to call National Socialists Fascists, because Fascism and National Socialism are distinct enough to be clearly separate ideologies. No aspect of Fascism is intertwined with Aryanism. In fact, Fascism is structured as a kind of Civic Nationalism, which is why Mussolini never targeted jews as a bourgouis race, at until the National Socialists controlled what was left of government.
Being pro-white does not mean your a NatSoc. Being a NatSoc makes you unequivocally a Leftist.
The problem with American National Socialism is that it frames itself as the sole legitimate defenders of white people. The same way every Leftist ideology claims authority over it's asserted protected group. Like all other Leftist ideologies, they are liars who are guaranteed to harm that protected group more than anyone else.
That is completely and utterly false. Read Hitler.
Not only did Hitler explicitly say that he was a Socialist and that National Socialism was Socialist. He explicitly stated that National Socialism was true Socialism, where Marxism had failed to be properly Socialist.
White people as a racial construct are not going to simply die out, that's not really a thing.
As evidenced by the fact that every race and ethnicity that ever has existed still exists, because it’s not really a thing that any of them die out or anything….
You make it seem like: dying and morphing are the same concept. Yes, the Huns no longer exist as an ethnic group, but you'd have to be an idiot to think that the Huns were exterminated to the very last man by other German tribes. No, they just morphed into other populations and were identified by a new concept.
Race, on the other hand, has two issues.
If we are using it in it's colloquial sense, it is a political construct, so it doesn't really mesh with anything outside of specific government systems.
If we are using the biological sense, then we are talking about phenotypes, and those really haven't changed in 40,000 years.
You make it seem like: dying and morphing are the same concept.
And there it is. The final dissembling that reveals your true colors. It’s okay if whites are bred out of existence because some white women will be used to birth increasingly non-white children. Just like the native Americans will live on in Elizabeth Warren.
What are you even talking about? The Huns do not exist as a separate ethnic group because over centuries they morphed into other ethnic groups. Aryans don't exist either, yet they became other ethnic groups. Celts don't technically exist when the affiliation with "Irish" and "Welsh" are more significant. But none of these populations died out.
I don't think you understand how ethnicities work. The Celts, Aryans, and Huns were not genocided, nor exterminated, nor did they "fade out". Other ethnic groups and civilizations come from them.
Sure. Their primary concern is that it lends legitimacy to the claim that white people will cease to exist and white children are in danger. I wouldn't agree with that if it were 1978. White people as a racial construct are not going to simply die out, that's not really a thing. However, there is rampant, systemic, anti-white discrimination at this point that endangers white kids and teaches them to hate themselves.
The saying itself is not much of a problem. All the other crazy shit before and after it is, and more specifically, the idea that the best way to protect white people is with socialism; well that's a special case of retard.
Socialism didn't protect Russia, Germany, or Britain. Imagine being fucking retarded enough to think that therefore Socialism would protect white people, when Socialism is actively destroying white people right now.
Frankly, fuck their concerns. I'm not going to for a single minute take the arguments of people who absolutely despise "whiteness" when it comes to whether or not white people should look after themselves. It's a bit of a conflict of interests, I'd say.
It's like the people who take every single instance of anything as proof that climate change is real, and they should push the agendas they already wanted to push. Or the disarmament squad, who will take any event as a sign they need to push the gun control legislation they already wanted to push.
They're not reliable or trustworthy, so frankly their concerns when it comes to white people is beyond worthless.
I mean, I would have thought so too. Until you notice what they're doing to any and every "white majority" country (and I put that in quotes because they don't call black countries "black majority," or Asian countries "Asian majority," and the whole concept is a linguistic attack itself.) It's not going to be soon, but if white people aren't allowed to have anything for themselves, and any group of predominately or exclusively white people is deemed racist...over time, yes, "white people" will absolutely die out, or at least shrivel away to nothing. and once the numbers get low enough, probably get genocided actively even nearer to extinction. You just have to look at the trends to realize that, yes, white people are being shoved out, and that will at least potentially result in eventual near extinction.
And, if white people aren't allowed to have an identity, but every other racial group is, and they're mostly trained to hate white people...yeah, whites aren't faring too well in that scenario.
Tell them that.
Awwww shit, there you go again. One of my least favorite arguments. If you care about white people, you're a socialist and a leftist. Tiresome.
No one is calling for socialism. You just use that as a smear against people you don't like, to try to score cheap points. It's a shame, too. You're obviously a smart guy, and you're good on plenty of subjects. But this is just bullshit, and it annoys me every time you, and others using the same playbook, use that tactic.
If defending white people is socialism, what should white people do? Because you seem to just lump anything pro-white in with Nazism, and Nazism in with socialism (yeah, point, but it's a tad more complicated), and then with leftism. So basically, to you, any pro-white movement is inherently leftist, and thus inherently retarded. So do white people just die out, or what?
I'm a white person who cares about white people, and thinks they're under attack. What is an acceptable attitude or response?
Just go die in the woods alone like a freedom loving rugged individual bruh
Still a more respectful answer than leftists would give, so that's something, I suppose.
It really is absurd that 'just let white people die out on their own' is a compassionate take when grading on a bell curve, where leftists are involved.
Pretty sure letting white people go off and die in the woods in freedom is far-right white supremacy nowadays. Yikes.
Funny (prompted by the thread yesterday), I've just been watching Bond. So this is very topical.
That thread is probably why it popped into my head
No, this is Progressive Nationalist doctrine. Even in the worst case you can politically imagine, stateless peoples exist regardless of political recognition. That isn't even remotely going to come to that.
No, just the opposite. If your are a Leftist or a Socialist, then I know for a fact you don't care about American Whites. The same way a Feminist doesn't care about women, or a BLM activist doesn't care about American Blacks.
Open and immediate confrontation against racialist bullshit. That's what I've done, even at work, directly to people's faces. I make it clear that under no uncertain terms I will respond to racialism with direct, open, immediate hostility and condemnation regardless of consequence. I will not tolerate it, and will not tolerate it being pushed onto my co-workers, nor any member of my team.
You don't tolerate it, you don't compromise, you set the tempo of the battle and you start it early. "But you could lose your job!" Good. Don't work for racist, Nazi, trash. If you are a good employee, then they don't deserve you, and better people should earn your labor.
And yes, that includes these fucking Black National Socialist terrorists talking about "racial equity" and "social justice".
Beyond that, take care of your neighbors, family, friends, and local community. Be the pillar of your community. If you really want to effect positive change for American Whites, then you need to check out what Booker T. Washington did for American Blacks.
Your word salad gets exhausting.
And, again, I'm not trying to be mean, I don't dislike or disrespect you. I know you're a smart guy. I just thing you're on the wrong side of this, and disingenuous on this topic as well.
Stateless people exist...but not as any sort of power. Stateless people exist...at the mercy of the State.
Again, they're after white people, in every white location. I know you know this. Over time, that will result in white people fading out. In any nonwhite location, whites are the outsiders. In any white location...well, our own governments are turning against us steadily, we have affirmative action against us, we often have all but "No Whites Allowed" signs. If the trend continues, that doesn't leave us anywhere at all pleasant.
US went from +90% white to ~60% in around a century. Many other "white majority" (again, linguistic attack on white countries, no one else is a "majority" country, they're just an Asian or black country, or whatever) followed the same trend. All power structures are against whites. There is no pro-white group with power really anywhere in the world. Almost any country that went from majority white to minority white basically genocided the white people there.
To act like it's impossible that whites get driven to utter irrelevance and put to the mercy of people who have declared their hatred of us means you're either not paying attention (which I know isn't true), or just don't want to admit it.
Again, linguistics. You accuse anyone who says they're for white people of being socialist leftists. So it doesn't matter who you say cares about white people and who doesn't, when you label anyone who says they care about white people as people who by definition can't care about white people. Nope.
Why don’t you hate him? He is clearly your enemy. You should despise him.
I honestly believe something broke him 2 months ago, what that is or was I dunno, but he spurted gibberish which was removed and never answer my query about it.
None of this is a word salad, I'm being as explicitly clear as is possible.
None of this has ever been true. Even when people are within empires, power still exists without being an ethno-state. If it weren't true, Poland wouldn't exist, and we'd still be talking about the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Ethno-states are typically the exception in history. A people can have power even without the states to do so.
Actually, I just thought of a good example!
Jews.
They didn't even have a state for over a thousand years.
Again, not even in the worst case scenario, and I don't think the worst case will come to pass.
That's because the concept of "white racial solidarity" is an anathema to white people. Even the Nazis weren't Pro-White. They were Pro-German. The are only two groups that were ever really "pro-white". The British Anglos, and the Southern Scoth-Irish & Anglo former Whigs. Even then, those people used two different definitions. The British Anglos referring primarily to the Peoples of Great Britain; and the American Southerner Whigs referring to non-Blacks & non-Orientals. The Brits are, frankly, a mess because of the conflict between the old definition and the American definition; and the Americans south abandoned white racialism because it didn't do shit to help them.
Whomever told you that white people could be driven to irrelevance or vassalized forgot they landed on the moon.
No, seriously, being stateless does not mean being without power or influence in a society. "The only legitimate method for political power is a government job" is simply not understanding history, or operating off of a Leftist dialectic on power.
You're just refusing to listen. I accuse Socialists of being Socialists. Being pro-white is not even definitive of an ideology. The issue is that people assume that National Socialists have a monopoly on that claim. They don't. They are race traitors 100% of the time because they will always sacrifice their own clientele class for power.
The people who like to call people NAZI and the people who wish to be NAZI are similar in neither group actually know about NAZIs politically speaking.
Fascism is the practical application of Socialism.
National Socialism is the practical application of Race Communism.
The more the Leftist tries to make his ideals work, the more he becomes a Fascist or a National Socialist. This is because if he tries to hold to his raw principles (like Bolshevism or Anarcho-Communism) the either dies or immediately kills the guy standing next to him. His ideology is so blood-thirsty and psychotic that it can only work when he off-loads his blood-thirsty psychosis to the state to manage for him. Hence, why it is practical.
I'm not a fascist myself (actually a bit of a lolbertarian, insert laughter here), but that's a massive oversimplification. You people love to say fascism is socialism is leftism, to try to discredit people you call Nazis. Ironically, a leftist tactic itself. Your argument is literally the leftist argument of calling anyone a Nazi, but you just extrapolate to then say that all Nazis are leftists, because that's a more damaging attack to the targets you use it on.
I could go into detail how fascism isn't (always) socialism or leftism, but that isn't really the point. I started to, but then deleted it. Point is, your argument amounts to calling people you disagree with leftists, while passing through Nazism first, as mentioned above. It doesn't really matter if fascism is socialism or not; it's a disingenuous attack, unless used against people who explicitly wear the Nazi label. And even then, you have to back it up a bit, or you're just calling people leftists, just like the left calls everyone Nazis.
Being pro-white does not mean you're a Nazi, and being Nazi does not mean you're a leftist.
Being pro-white, as a white person, is good. That has nothing to do with Nazism, socialism, or leftism.
I'm white. I like white people. More importantly, I stand by the right to say that, from a freedom perspective. I'm not a Nazi. I'm not a socialist. I'm not a leftist. I am pro-white, though.
Fascism is Socialism explicitly, by it's own terminology. It just happens to be a very specific variant of Socialism which can be summarized to: Italian State Syndicalism.
Fascism is Socialism. There is no mechanism which allows it to not be Socialism. It literally can't be anything else. You can claim that "calling people you disagree with leftists" is simply not part of it. I disagree with Monarchism, but I've never called a Monarchist a Leftist, because Monarchism is not part of Leftism. Fascism is Leftism because it is Leftism. Disagreeing with me is irrelevant. Communism, Socialism, Fabian Socialism, Democratic Socialism, Social Democracy, Progressivism, Fascism, National Socialism, Anarcho-Syndicalism, Titoism, Maoism, Marxism, Marxist-Leninism, are all Leftist ideologies due to them ideologically stemming from Rousseau.
Furthermore, I'm not going to call National Socialists Fascists, because Fascism and National Socialism are distinct enough to be clearly separate ideologies. No aspect of Fascism is intertwined with Aryanism. In fact, Fascism is structured as a kind of Civic Nationalism, which is why Mussolini never targeted jews as a bourgouis race, at until the National Socialists controlled what was left of government.
Being pro-white does not mean your a NatSoc. Being a NatSoc makes you unequivocally a Leftist.
The problem with American National Socialism is that it frames itself as the sole legitimate defenders of white people. The same way every Leftist ideology claims authority over it's asserted protected group. Like all other Leftist ideologies, they are liars who are guaranteed to harm that protected group more than anyone else.
That is completely and utterly false. Read Hitler.
Not only did Hitler explicitly say that he was a Socialist and that National Socialism was Socialist. He explicitly stated that National Socialism was true Socialism, where Marxism had failed to be properly Socialist.
As evidenced by the fact that every race and ethnicity that ever has existed still exists, because it’s not really a thing that any of them die out or anything….
You make it seem like: dying and morphing are the same concept. Yes, the Huns no longer exist as an ethnic group, but you'd have to be an idiot to think that the Huns were exterminated to the very last man by other German tribes. No, they just morphed into other populations and were identified by a new concept.
Race, on the other hand, has two issues.
If we are using it in it's colloquial sense, it is a political construct, so it doesn't really mesh with anything outside of specific government systems.
If we are using the biological sense, then we are talking about phenotypes, and those really haven't changed in 40,000 years.
And there it is. The final dissembling that reveals your true colors. It’s okay if whites are bred out of existence because some white women will be used to birth increasingly non-white children. Just like the native Americans will live on in Elizabeth Warren.
Fuck you.
He is an actual demon.
What are you even talking about? The Huns do not exist as a separate ethnic group because over centuries they morphed into other ethnic groups. Aryans don't exist either, yet they became other ethnic groups. Celts don't technically exist when the affiliation with "Irish" and "Welsh" are more significant. But none of these populations died out.
I don't think you understand how ethnicities work. The Celts, Aryans, and Huns were not genocided, nor exterminated, nor did they "fade out". Other ethnic groups and civilizations come from them.