Counter-Currents
Don Coccotti (Christopher Walken) confronts Clifford Worley (Dennis Hopper) in True Romance.
1,193 words
A white friend of mine has curly hair. This eight-word sentence shouldn’t be too shocking, and her appearance is certainly nothing jarring when seen in public. In the era of limitless promotion of miscegenation and glorification of all things black, however, my friend is seemingly not allowed to be plain old white in the eyes of the average adherent to our oligarchy’s race-doctrine. “What are you?” is a question she’s casually received in reference to her race. When she flatly responds that she’s white, a typical retort is something along the lines of, “Oh, you look so ethnic,” and her curly hair is almost always referenced. It is amazing how “ethnic” is utilized as a synonym for non-white, and apparently no one north of the Mediterranean is allowed to have curly hair.
If conversation on the matter persists and a fair-weather ethnographer asks about her white ethnic background, she’ll occasionally divulge the fact that one of her grandparents was of Sicilian descent . . . and then it happens: “Oh, you know that means you’re part African,” is a response she’s heard many times. If anyone needs a quick geographical refresher, though it’s surely nearby, Sicily is not in Africa; it’s an island in the Mediterranean a few miles from the toe of the Italian peninsula’s boot. So why the certainty that being from Sicily means she’s part African? I distinctly remember hearing someone reiterate to her — almost verbatim — Dennis Hopper’s monologue from True Romance, a 1993 film directed by Tony Scott based on a screenplay written by Quentin Tarantino before he became a superstar with 1994’s Pulp Fiction.
For those that haven’t seen the movie, a quick recap: A Sicilian-American mobster, Vincenzo Coccotti (Christopher Walken), is chasing Clarence Worley (Christian Slater), a man on the run after accidentally stealing drugs. Early in the movie the mob tortures Clarence’s father, Clifford (Dennis Hopper), to obtain his son’s whereabouts. Clifford attempts to steer his son’s pursuers in the wrong direction, but Coccotti knows he is lying and informs Clifford that “Sicilians are great liars” and he’s capable of detecting any lie when he’s told one. Accepting his fate, Clifford decides to antagonize Coccotti and tells him the following story:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yslqyrO3beg
Clifford: You’re Sicilian, huh?
Coccotti: Yeah, Sicilian.
Clifford: You know, I read a lot. Especially about things in history. I find that shit fascinating. Here’s a fact, I don’t know whether you know or not: Sicilians . . . were spawned by niggers.
Coccotti: [raises eyebrows in disbelief] Come again? [laughs]
Clifford: No, it’s a fact. You see, Sicilians have black blood pumpin’ through their hearts. If you don’t believe me, you can look it up. Hundreds and hundreds of years ago, you see, the Moors conquered Sicily. And the Moors are niggers.
Coccotti: Yes . . .
Clifford: So you see, way back then, Sicilians were like wops from northern Italy. They all had blond hair and blue eyes, but then the Moors moved in there, and they changed the whole country. They did so much fucking with Sicilian women that they changed the whole bloodline forever. That’s why blond hair and blue eyes became black hair and dark skin. You know, it’s absolutely amazing to me to think that to this day, hundreds of years later, that Sicilians still carry that nigger gene. Now this . . .
[Coccotti laughs]
Clifford: No, I’m quoting history. It’s written. It’s a fact, it’s written.
Coccotti: [laughing] I love this guy. [stumbling on words through his laughter] This guy.
Clifford: Your ancestors are niggers! Hey. Yeah. And your great-great-great-great grandmother fucked a nigger, yeah, and she had a half-nigger kid . . . Now, if that’s a fact, tell me, am I lying? ‘Cause you — [points at Coccotti] you’re part eggplant.
Coccotti: Ohhh!
Clifford: Huh? [while twisting his index finger in the air] Hey! Hey! Hey!
Coccotti: You’re a cantaloupe. [laughing] Ohhh! This guy, beautiful. [He kisses Clifford on the cheeks, then whispers something to his henchman, stopping to turn around and chuckle at Clifford. He continues, then turns around holding a gun and shoots Clifford in the head three times, lamenting the fact that this is the first time he’s killed anyone since 1984.]
You can buy Trevor Lynch’s White Nationalist Guide to the Movies here
The audience ends up believing that everything professed by Clifford is true, since, as Coccotti said, he can always tell when someone is lying. Written by Quentin Tarantino, this monologue is often cited by film enthusiast pretenders as an early example of how great Tarantino’s dialogue is. It’s also a prelude to the reoccurring motif of ethnomasochism in several of his films — but more on that another time. What is truly amazing is how a bit of dialogue consisting of vague historical references written by one of Hollywood’s most fantastical filmmakers can so easily be laundered through mid-wit and college-bro pop culture and come out the other side as something ostensibly true.
Yes, the Moors invaded and conquered Sicily, and the intermingling of Byzantine and Arab cultures inevitably followed. It’s also true that men and women from the two peoples procreated, forcefully or voluntarily, but did every Sicilian woman on the entire island give birth to a half-breed? It’s also not the case that the Moors were black; Moor was an ancient term originally used by the Romans to refer to Arabs and Berbers from northern Africa who, while certainly not white, were not black, either. And not long after the Moors occupied the island, it was again conquered by an outside force: the Normans. Has any Hollywood hack asserted that all Sicilians are therefore part French as a result? Of course not, because it wouldn’t get under the skin of an evil, assumedly racist, ethnocentric Sicilian mobster in the same way. But also have yet to hear this from any pontificating pseudo-intellectuals; which makes sense, since, when it comes to demeaning whites, I guess they, in part, get their reasoning from fictional movies.
What is interesting about this pop culture-derived phenomenon, however, is how devotees of our current zeitgeist’s approved views on black people and their — so we’re told — docile, harmless, and beautiful culture are inadvertently admitting that, apparently, they’re all rapists. Or, maybe proponents of Tarantino’s black/Sicilian theory have simply been inundated with so much interracial porn that they now assume that all the Sicilian women were lining up to sleep with Moors. Either way, it’s weird to hear someone cite this scene in order to tell a stranger about what his racial background is, as if we didn’t have DNA tests to find that out.
Our social engineers are well aware of where the populace takes it cues from. Just as Native Americans were forced to learn English, and white Catholics were kicked out of cities (and their parishes) and coerced into public school, the whole of Western (and especially American) populations takes it racial education from — besides public schooling — Netflix, Hollywood, novels, music, and any other form of entertainment media. None of this is anything revelatory to readers of Counter-Currents; it’s merely a personal example and illustration of the way in which entertainment influences people.
The saddest part of it all, however, is that my friend and I both love True Romance.
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate $120 or more per year.
- First, donor comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Second, donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Non-donors will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days.
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, sign up here:
Paywall Gift Subscriptions
If you are already behind the paywall and want to share the benefits, Counter-Currents also offers paywall gift subscriptions. We need just five things from you:
- your payment
- the recipient’s name
- the recipient’s email address
- your name
- your email address
To register, just fill out this form and we will walk you through the payment and registration process. There are a number of different payment options.
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
56 comments
True Romance almost absolves itself of the crime of convincing everyone that Sicilians are part black by giving us the most wonderfully repulsive (and hence most truthful) depiction of a Detroit wigger in film in the form of Drexl Spivey, played by Gary Oldman.
In any event, the film certainly couldn’t be made in today’s Hollywood.
Gary Oldman’ Drexl is ten times the wigger as his co-star, the real life wigger Michael Rappaport.
Michael Rappaport is an Ashkenazi and most certainly NOT a European in the least.
Not disputing that, just pointing out that he is the dictionary definition of a wigger.
Valid point, the character is completely detestable
Little back story on Tarantino: A revolving door of ex criminal African American men used to come to his house and have sex with his single mother. One of these convicts told this story about Sicilians to a young Quentin. True story. This is also why Tarantino feels that he has a N-word pass in his movies.
Now first things first the Moors were in Spain not Sicily. The word derives from Morocco/Mauritania. Sicily was under the control of Saracens for about 150 years until conquered by the Normans and then Frederick II Hohenstaufen exiled them all in 1245. Any foreign admixture in modern Sicilians is insignificant at best. A study of haplogroups show that there is significant genetic similarity among Italians and the pre-Roman inhabitants of the peninsula (regardless of region).
P.S Read Jim Goad’s critique of Tarantino. Absolutely skewers him alive hence making any film of his unwatchable.
Fascinating and disgusting, and I’ll definitely read Goad’s piece, thanks.
And I could be off here, but I used “Moors” under the vague European definition of the Middle Ages which just meant they were from North Africa; I thought Saracen was a catch-all term of the era to simply classify Muslims… more of a religious vice geographical descriptor.
This one, right?
https://www.takimag.com/article/quentin_tarantinos_empty_screen_jim_goad/
I recall a few years ago the hashtag “Italians are black” was trending on twitter, and I’m almost 100% sure all the retards sharing it were citing this bullshit Moor story to prove their point. I remember Italians angrily posting pictures of themselves to prove they weren’t black.
Never heard about this, that’s absolutely cringeworthy.
“None of this is anything revelatory to readers of Counter-Currents; it’s merely a personal example and illustration of the way in which entertainment influences people.”
Sad but accurate comment which I’d prefer to see include the adjective ‘stupid’ because this formerly great country has a population of mostly dumb/stupid people and then there are still the negroids.
Thanks for mentioning the most important part of the dialogue wherein Coccotti tells Clifford that he can always tell a lie. Any clip of this exchange I’ve ever seen always leaves that out.
Yea the lie line is key since, though the movie is obviously fictional, it sets the stage for the subsequent Sicilian/Black dialogue to be treated as holy gospel. I know it shouldn’t, but it continues to amaze me how educated adults will take entertainment and treat it as fact.
Sicilians have been thought of as mixed long before True Romance.
You can blame other Italians, as it was them who started calling them half-breeds centuries ago. The truth is Sicilians have a big range of phenotypes — some do look very non-European, and culturally Sicily has always been somewhat different from other southern Italian regions.
True Romance is a good movie, though. That scene is memorable only because of Walken — who doesn’t look Italian at all but he’s so good that nobody cares.
Yea the northern/southern Italian divide has been a thing for a long time, and Sicily’s location has served as a crossroads for every Mediterranean power that’s existed: Phoenicians, Greeks, Carthaginians, Romans, Moors, Normans, etc etc. but none of this should imply that Sicilians are anything other than (majority) Sicilian.
I’ve never heard any argument that modern Turks should identify as Celtic because the Galicians once lived there.
Not just Sicily, Southern Italy is very mixed.
See these excerpts from The Race Change in Western Europe :
“Historians have recognized that a tremendous change of attitude and/or temperament took place in the people of Italy… Italy, by the 1st century of our era, had become a Semitic country.”
“Frank concludes, “By far the larger part (perhaps ninety per cent) had eastern blood in their veins” (Frank, “Race Mixture in the Roman Empire,” p.690). It was no slip of the pen when Paul stated to the Roman people of his time that the majority of them could then claim Abraham as their fleshly father (Romans 4:1). By the 1st century of our era, a change of race had taken place in Italy. Italy had, for all practical purposes, become a Semitic country.”
That source reads like Right Wing Christian crankery.
Southern Italy has never been colonized( not military occupied)by any non European population, other than Greek colonization which is bit exaggerated, it population has remain largely isolated and homogeneous.
But Rome had a massive slave population, with slaves originating from the Middle East, these slaves were later freed. : “But how did these eastern peoples get into Italy? Some came by migration, but the vast majority (as the records show) came as slaves. When Rome conquered the east, vast numbers of peoples were captured and brought back to Italy as slaves. The great majority came from the east, particularly Asia Minor and Syria.”
That Bronze/Iron Age Middle Eastern farmers “colonized” southern Europe is well known, and the admixture in Italy from the Middle Eastern farmers has much lower incidence in Northern Italy compared with Central Italy and Southern Italy.
Semitic admixture in Southern Italians is also due to Ashkenazi Jews:
The close genetic resemblance to Italians accords with the historical presumption that Ashkenazi Jews started their migrations across Europe in Italy and with historical evidence that conversion to Judaism was common in ancient Rome.
Modern Jews may traditionally trace their ancestry to the Holy Land, but a new genetic study finds otherwise. A detailed look at thousands of genomes finds that Ashkenazim—who make up roughly 80% of the world’s Jews, including 90% of those in America and half of those in Israel—ultimately came not from the Middle East, but from… Italy.
More than 80% of Ashkenazi mtDNAs had their origins thousands of years ago in Western Europe, during or before Biblical times—and in some cases even before farming came to that part of the continent some 7500 years ago. The closest matches were with mtDNAs from people who today live in and around Italy. The results imply that the Jews can trace their heritage to women who had lived in Europe at that time. Very few Ashkenazi mtDNAs could be traced to the Middle East.
“The data are very convincing,” says Antonio Torroni, a geneticist at the University of Pavia in Italy and a leading expert in the genetics of Europeans. He adds that recent studies of DNA from the cell nucleus have also shown “a very close similarity between Ashkenazi Jews and Italians.”
It is thought that a substantial Jewish community was present in Rome from at least the mid-second century BCE… These analyses suggest that the first major wave of assimilation probably took place in Mediterranean Europe, most likely in the Italian peninsula ~2 ka
“It’s commonly thought that slaves made up a huge percentage of Italy’s population during the Roman Empire, and that most were of foreign origin, eventually replacing the native Italians. Historian Nathan Rosenstein turns this conventional notion on its head by showing that previous estimates of slaves’ numbers are all wrong, and that increases in urban populations were caused instead by migrants from rural areas of Italy. These findings are supported by DNA evidence that detects no significant change in Italy’s gene pool from the Iron Age.” http://italianthro.blogspot.com/2010/09/minimal-impact-of-roman-slavery.html?m=1. “It’s often claimed that Italians, especially Southern Italians, cluster with Ashkenazi Jews. At the very least, that’s backwards because it’s Jews who have mixed origins, pulling them away from West Asia and toward Europe. That, and the correspondence between geographic and genetic distance, puts them closest to Southern Europeans. However, when enough markers are used (or the right kinds of markers) the two groups can be distinguished, just as each can be distinguished from others. Indeed, Ashkenazi Jews form their own unique cluster, while Italians belong to a broader Southern European cluster, expectedly plotting between Spaniards and Greeks.”http://italianthro.blogspot.com/2010/10/italians-genetically-distinct-from-jews.html?m=1
Ashkenazi Jews are very close to Europeans, mostly because they have a lot of Italian ancestry (not the other way around), but they’re still genetically distinct from Italians.
“These findings are supported by DNA evidence that detects no significant change in Italy’s gene pool from the Iron Age.”
But both the Iron Age Middle Eastern farmers and the Middle Eastern slaves of Rome were from a Middle Eastern gene pool, so assuming that the italianthro blog is correct, it is kind of expected that there is no significant change in Italy’s gene pool from the Iron Age.
The other italianthro claim about Ashkenazi Jews is from 2010, the studies quoted above are from 2013. Also the studies cited in the blog are based on PCA, but “PCA results are highly dependent on which population groups are included in the analysis. Thus, there should be some caution in interpreting these results and other results from similar analytic methods with respect to ascribing origins of particular ethnic groups.”
The studies cited above show
Italians and Greeks are closer to the Middle Eastern populations than Ashkenazi Jews.
EEJ (Eastern European Jews) are closer to Italians in particular and to Europeans in general than to the other Jewish populations... The resemblance of EEJ to Italians and other European populations portrays them as an autochthonous European population… Ashkenazi Jews … their smallest distance is to Italians and then to Greeks… EEJ or Ashkenazi Jews are much closer to non-Jewish Europeans than to these Jewish populations in all three studies.
EEJ (Eastern European Jews) are Europeans probably of Roman descent who converted to Judaism at times, when Judaism was the first monotheistic religion that spread in the ancient world. Any other theory about their origin is not supported by the genetic data… Overall, it seems that at least 80% of Ashkenazi maternal ancestry is due to the assimilation of mtDNAs indigenous to Europe, most likely through conversion.
wno’s comments are confused and not well informed. I discuss Southern Italian genetics, broadly, in my comments down below. As for whether slaves had any lasting genetic impact on Italy, it seems that most led short and brutish lives, without progeny. They died in mines, they died in galleys, they died of urban squalor. The exceptions were just that, exceptions. After the depopulation events of the 6th century, the horrendous wars between Justinian & the Ostrogoths and the plague, most Italian cities were husks of their former selves. They were repopulated from the countryside, i.e., by genetically “pristine” Italians.
Moving on to Jews. My pet theory is that Sephardics = Carthaginians (who had colonies in Spain and trading quarters throughout Mediterranean). Also, it seems that certain West Mediterranean Jewish lines descend from Etruscan-related y-haplogroups, coalescing as exclusively Jewish around 300 AD. As for the Ashkenazi, the prevailing theory is that recent arrivals from the Levant admixed with Italian women, most likely in the South of Italy, around 750 AD (others put admixture date around 200 to 300 AD, when there were less barriers to mixing). But let us not forget that this mixed Jewish-Italian population moved to the north of the Alps, where they mixed with local German and Slavic groups. East European admixture in modern Ashkenazi is around 15 to 25%.
The Sicilian people are by in large Greeks in my opinion, having been part of Magna Graecia us forever. Hell they even followed the Byzantine Rite until the Norman overlords Latinized them during Roger’s Rule. French/Norman rule was pretty enduring also.
Moors were not negroes, any more than Berbers were. And about half of all Sicilians I see are as white as Christopher Walken, or any other northern European. Some really swarthy ones, of course, but they’re no more the standard issue than redheads among Irish and Scots.
Though the show is hit or miss, there’s a great Portlandia skit where everyone starts taking DNA tests and identifying with the most extreme minority of their genetic makeup. It’s obviously supposed to be silly but the fact that people frequently do this in real life makes it less (or more?) so.
Northern Italians call southern Italians stupid and lazy, and southern Italians call northern Italians ‘Austrians ‘.
The right hand of Tony Soprano whose name eludes me and who gets whacked on the boat I believe, looks positively ‘early man’ to say the least.
I was just thinking of him when reading this piece. “Big Pussy Bonpensiero”, or something like that. Dude does NOT look white as I do, Trump does, etc. Italy has long been thought of as a biracial nation. Maybe not like Obama, but there are pronounced differences between the whiter, more productive and honest Northerners, and the less visibly white, less productive and more criminal Southerners. I long ago knew a young guy whose ancestors were all from the Italian “boot heel”. Even another classmate of ours initially thought this guy was Hispanic.
Yes, I think that’s his name. (I tend to not instinctively look things up so as to challenge my mnemonic ability). I wouldn’t describe them as Hispanic-looking because they only seem to share dark skin, and hirsuteness. The squinty eyes, and jaw shape of mestizos are distinctly non-european. There is one Latino actor (again I forget his name and will try to recall on my own, he’s in many movies, most recently I think in Wheelman starring Frank Grillo), this guy is borderline cro-magnon, the brow ridge specifically.
Is George Clooney white?
And what about Jimmy Fallon?
On average, Sicilians have 5% North African ancestry, similar to Spaniards. In other words, regrettable but not exactly a genetic tragedy. After all, during the Emirate of Sicily, Palermo competed with Constantinople for most sophisticated European capital. Credit where credit’s due. The Normans conquered Sicily and kept the Golden Age going but only left trace DNA. More noble elite than colonizers.
The Greeks, however, imparted a hefty 35% DNA contribution when all of Southern Italy became Magna Graecia. Greeks & Southern Italians are closely related genetically, so it was more of a “cousin colonization” than a foreign invasion.
Bottom line, Sicilians are a bit of a Mediterranean mix but this idea that they’re mulattos is slander, yet another sleight of hand intended to promote modern mass migration and miscegenation.
All very well put.
Do you know what a 95% European is? A white person. And my friend has one grandparent of Sicilian ancestry, the rest being Germanic I think… I’m no mathematician but that doesn’t sound like a mulatto.
Yep. Sicilians are white, full stop. If you look at a genetic distance chart, Sicilians cluster with all other Europeans. There is a North/South gradation, but it’s subtle.
There’s a much bigger gap from all Europeans to MENA peoples so that’s where I draw the line of “white”, but it’s fair to say they’re an adjacent grouping, genetically speaking. Then there’s a huge gap from everyone to Sub Saharan Africans. You don’t need a DNA test to see this gap in action.
I think the normans ethnically expelled all arab muslims from sicily about 800 years ago. So any nonwhite sicilians are probably migrants who arrived during the industrial revolution, learned the language, and then emigrated to the US where they were called italians.
Good point. I have to assume there were population exchanges due to Italy’s involvement in the era of European colonization of Africa and several subsequent Italian wars fought on African soil in the 19th and 20th centuries.
“And not long after the Moors occupied the island, it was again conquered by an outside force: the Normans. Has any Hollywood hack asserted that all Sicilians are therefore part French as a result? Of course not,”
Not to nitpick but the Normans were a Germanic people, albeit with a small Gallic admixture.
Like the poster Max I’ve also read that Sicilians have very little Arab- but a large amount of Greek- ancestry.
Interesting tidbit, somewhat related: Johnny Cash’s first wife, Vivian Liberto, was Sicilian, identified as white, and always got annoyed when people asked if she was black. Apparently, Cash told the KKK that she was white, so his marriage seemed to have ruffled some feathers in the South in the 60s.
Thing is, in the old B&W photos she looked black just a little. Striking looking woman. And it turns out she did have a tiny admixture of black DNA.
All this from Wikipedia:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vivian_Cash
From Wiki:
According to her official biographer Ann Sharpsteen, and Vivian Cash’s own words in her 2007 memoir, Vivian strongly identified throughout her life as a White/Sicilian-American and did not identify as Black or multi racial, stating in her memoir, “It didn’t help that Johnny issued a statement to the KKK informing them that I wasn’t black. To this day I hate when accusations and threats from people like that are dignified with any response at all.”
All Europeans genetically cluster together and are genetically distinct from non European populations Inc MENA populations.
All Europeans are genetically homogeneous. Far more so than any other racial group/ continental ancestry group.
With regards to foreign conquest for example the Moors in Sicily and or Spain, These were military conquest not mass immigration events where by and large the conquered population got on with life as 2nd class citizens in their own homeland as different rulers came and went and once the Muslims ( Inc ethnic European converts ) were expelled they were replaced by mainland Italians Lombards and Normans who underwent demographic expansions going forward.
True Romance is an anti white movie produced by anti white Hollywood and it’s scenes are irrelevant in the real world.
All Europeans are White and targeted for precisely that in all our homelands.
I was certain that somewhere in The Dispossessed Majority Wilmot Robertson mentions that Sicilians possess 10% Negroid blood. Alas, I cannot find that passage now. Perhaps I misremembered this (though it has stood out in my mind for the past 35 years), or maybe I read it in an old issue of Instauration.
Saw True Romance in theater one time, 30 years ago. The scene where James Gandolfini beats up the girl has always stuck with me, but otherwise, I recall almost nothing (except vaguely the Christian Slater character – and Brad Pitt as some surfer dopehead in a small scene).
I dated a 100% Sicilian-American girl in the early 00s. She looked basically white but “ethnic”. Like a lot of Jews, to be honest. But there must be a genetic reason why Southern Europeans are so much darker than Northerners. If we are still one race, at some point of gradation “race-body” gives way to “race-soul”. Sicilians can be considered ‘white’ while Turks cannot mainly due to history and culture, not mere biology (I’ve also known Turks who were as superficially white as Italians I’ve known).
Southern Europeans have an evolutionary ability to tan darker because of the much higher UV index in Southern Europe. Not because of any “outsider” blood. Southerners were never Nordic.
Northwest Europeans are unusually pale because of the low UV index in the region. I always maintain there is a range of phenotypes among Europeans and the limits are hard to define, but we know it when we see it.
If Wilmot Robertson said it, it must be true! How ridiculous.
No, I don’t think it was his opinion or own research. TDM was very well footnoted, so I’m sure that, if I’m remembering correctly, he would have cited some reputable ‘authority’ on the matter. Read the book for yourself, and you’ll see what I mean.
Maybe you should familiar yourself with the past 10 years or so of population genetics, which has completely transformed our understanding of prehistory. No matter how impressive Robertson might be as an authority for our movement, the fact is he wrote Dispossession in the early 70s. And even then, the likes of Carlton Coon never said Sicilians carry Sub-Saharan ancestry. So lord knows who or what Robertson cited, but I doubt it stands up to scrutiny.
Sicilians can be considered ‘white’ while Turks cannot mainly due to history and culture, not mere biology (I’ve also known Turks who were as superficially white as Italians I’ve known). The Romans and Greeks had colonies in that part of the world, so it would make sense that some Turks look European.
I would imagine at least a few thousand modern day Italians would be mixed- race due to the ‘marocchinate’ events of WW2 where Moroccan soldiers enlisted in France’s army raped Italian women during the collapse of the axis and allied occupation of that country.
Though this undoubtedly happened, it’s all well past the “Moors in Sicily” narrative that this conversation usually defaults to (the main theme of the article).
I’ve always wondered why this spear is lobbed specifically at Italians so frequently, particularly from our own camp (the comment count on this article somewhat proves this fact), but so much less toward other white ethnicities. For example, Soviet rapes of German women after the fall of Berlin are commonly referenced to highlight Red Army atrocities but I rarely hear the “bErLiNeRs ArE sLaViC mUtTs” narrative being spewed as a result of this… assumedly because it was white-on-white? Maybe a better example would be the Ottomans in Southeast Europe? That also happened a lot more recently and longer than the Moors in Sicily.
None of these comments are accusatory, just thoughts on the subject.
It’s due to an inferiority complex, as an Eastern European man I will gladly acknowledges Italy’s contribution to Western civilization. And the comments above are just rude and are a total exaggeration.
Though they haven’t contributed anything majorly new in the past 60 years or so, Italians know how to refine the shit out of already existing staples of Western culture, in my opinion. Do you know anyone that makes better bread, cheese, coffee, race cars, motorcycles, suits, leather jackets, painting (I’m a Giovanni Gasparro fanboy), perfected the art of lounging/enjoying life, etc. etc.
I’ll add Beretta guns to your list. I don’t own any weapons but I would love to buy a Beretta rifle with the beautiful drawings on the metal components. A visit to the plant in its fairy-tale setting in the Italian countryside would also be a treat.
Southern Italians are distinct from most other Europeans insofar as they carry a lot Bronze Age Anatolian ancestry. Basically, there were two massive migrations into Europe circa 2500 to 1500 BC, the “Aryan” influx from the Steppe and a roughly contemporaneous movement that ran from the Caucasus across Anatolia to the Greek Isles, the Balkans, Apulia, Calabria, Sicily. Both migrations were gradual and complex, with the migrant-invaders mixing with the groups they encountered as they slowly pushed westward. And both movements made their way into Italy, where they again mixed with indigenous groups along a genetic cline. It is not as if Southern Italians lack Aryan ancestry–they carry it in some measure–but they possess a much heavier Bronze Age Anatolian component.
Further, the Bronze Age Anatolians were not much different than the Minoan-like populations that had already fanned across Neolithic Europe, differing only in carrying a slightly higher percentage of Caucasian Hunter Gatherer (CHG) ancestry, plus some Levantine, maybe 5%. Remember, too, that CHG was a roughly 50% component of the Yamnaya (aka Aryan) make-up.
Southern Italians also carry about 2 to 5% Iberomaurusian ancestry, which could have come from several sources. First, Iberomaurusian was a minor component of the Levantine ancestry that fed into the larger Bronze Age Anatolian influx. Second, many North African groups (Carthaginians, Egyptians, Saracens) that later came into contact with Italy could have introduced this ancestry. However, my impression is that Iberomaurusian was present in significant levels throughout Italy, Iberia and the Balkans going back to pre-Neolithic times, and that it is a bit of a mystery that still needs to be solved. Here is an old theory, advanced by Denise Ferembach ===
The Iberomaurusians did not originate in the Near East nor the Egyptian Sudan. Neither did they come from Spain via the Strait of Gibraltar. They are probably Italian Epigravettians, who landed in Tunisia 24,000 years ago. From there, they spread towards the west (Morocco) and the east (the Egyptian Sudan), taking the place of the Aterian aborigines. Their ancestors were Aterians who, ca 50,000 years ago, possibly also making use of a marine regression, had reached the northern shores of the Mediterranean and had gradually replaced the original Neanderthal population of that area.
In terms of modern populations, Southern Italians are closest to Greek Islanders, as mainland Greeks were significantly transformed by Slavic incursions. Which is to say, Southern Italians and Greek Islanders have been among the most stable populations of Europe over the past 2500 years. They simply were not subjected to any mass or folk migration events, with any alien blood washed away like to so many insignificant drops by the preexisting current.
Greek Islanders have significant recent Turkish and levantine admixture
Regardless, it’s who Southern Italians are closest to genetically. And if you want to write-off Southern Italians as somehow non-European, then at least be consistent and give-up the entire legacy of Ancient Greece. If the race of Homer, Plato & Aristotle has genetic heirs, they are to be found first in the Italian South.
All the Southern Italian groups, besides showing a general high affinity with Anatolian and European Neolithic farmers, cluster also closely with the Chalcolithic and Bronze Age samples from Anatolian and Aegean (Minoan and Mycenaean) populations . . . . Both Sardinians and Northern Italians show higher affinity to WHG than Southern Italians, who instead appear more affected by CHG-related groups. On the other hand, Yamnaya Steppe and EHG share more affinity to North Italy than to both Southern Italians and Sardinians . . . . Previous surveys on the ancient genetic legacy of Southern Italy pointed to genetic contributions linking Southern Italy and Mediterranean Greek islands with Anatolia and the Caucasus tracing back to migratory events occurred during the Neolithic and the Bronze Age, in which the Mediterranean served as a preferential crossroad. In particular, while the expansion of Anatolian Neolithic farmers significantly impacted all the Peninsula, differential Bronze-Age contributions were observed for Southern Italy with respect to Northern Italian populations. Bronze Age influences in the gene pool of Southern Italians have been in fact associated to a non-steppe Caucasian-related ancestry carried along the Mediterranean shores at the same time, but independently from the Pontic-Caspian Steppe migrations that occurred through Continental Europe. Consistently with this viewpoint, genetic analyses performed by comparing our modern populations with the main ancient ancestral sources have displayed the clustering of analysed Southern Italian groups with Neolithic and Bronze Age samples from Anatolian, Aegean Minoan and Mycenaean populations, as opposed to the affinity of Northern Italy with Late-Neolithic and Bronze-Age samples from continental Europe
Homer who wrote of huge blond princes and warriors?
Madison Grant: “Both the Trojans and the Greeks were commanded by huge blond princes, the heroes of Homer, while the bulk of the armies on both sides was composed of little brunet Pelasgians, imperfectly armed and remorselessly butchered by the leaders on either side.”
Jon Harrison Sims: “Homer (and Pindar) describe most of the Olympian gods and goddesses as fair haired and “bright eyed,” meaning blue, grey or green. The goddess Demeter has “blond” or “yellow hair,” as does Leto, mother of Apollo, who is also described as “golden haired.” Aphrodite has “pale-gold” hair, and Athena is known as “the fair, bright-eyed one” and the “grey-eyed goddess.” https://www.amren.com/news/2016/10/what-race-were-the-ancient-greeks-and-romans/
My god! Some of you people treat certain figures as intellectual heroes, Wilmot Robertson and Madison Grant, and their every word as gospel truth! It is ridiculous to imagine that the Ancient Greeks were blonde and fair. Even if you subscribe to the notion that the “aristocratic egalitarianism” portrayed by Homer had its primordial origin on the Steppe–a highly questionable thesis much loved in nationalist circles–you must still reckon with the fact that these Steppe warriors mixed with the Early European Farmers and took on their phenotype.
I don’t have the time or patience to go through this exhaustively. Read up on the scientific literature. I give you only this article, which uses anthropological terms straight out of Coon ==
https://www.greecehighdefinition.com/blog/2019/5/30/racial-type-of-the-ancient-hellenes-a-racial-analysis-of-the-ancient-greeks
And this video = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RPjMJa-aFY
Blondism was a minority trait among Ancient Greeks, its ultimate source is obscure.
Here’s another good article on the subject ==
https://thuletide.wordpress.com/2020/10/03/blond-haired-supermen-the-origin-of-blondism-and-the-pigmentation-of-the-proto-indo-europeans/#:~:text=Interestingly%2C%20the%20Early%20European%20Farmer%20populations%20of%20North,have%20been%20slightly%20blonder%20than%20the%20Corded%20Ware.
Sicilians cluster close to other Italians and show limited admixture with North Africans of probably less than 5%, too little to influence phenotype.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_history_of_Italy
Lazaridis has Scilians as very close to Ashkenazi Jews on a PCA.
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Principal-Component-Analysis_fig2_280840328
Thing is though, Sicilians don’t have an organization to censor you, don’t dominate your hierarchies, don’t play a role in getting God out of school or opening your borders to non-whites. They just do some Mafia stuff, hire their relatives more, and make thicker pizza. Comparatively innocuous.
Anyway sorry for being correct and boring and not as entertaining as Quentin Tarantino.
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Paywall Access
Lost your password?Edit your comment