Would it be more historically precise to call it Anglo-Saxon supremacy?

image.png

The Angles, the Saxons, the Belgae, the Franks, the Normans, the Geats, the Danes, etc were all part of the Germanic family of tribes, who took over Europe after the fall of the Roman Empire, got Christianized, and formed "modern Europe." These are also the initial settlers of North America--Anglo-Saxon-Normans.

The Germanic heritage tribes are still settled and identified with the North Atlantic--and they have at least a 1000 year history of antagonism to the Slav peoples, which gradually, over the development of fake race science became racist.

The Anglo-Saxon idea of supremacy over the Slav sphere found expression in Hitler's General plan Ost--the planned starvation and enslavement of Slavs of the East (USSR then) and the general conception of the rest of European Slavs as inferior and/or subhuman. Today the raw hatred of all things Russian could be so easily whipped up virulently-- in particular in US and UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand (with Germany, I sense, showing in general less fervor)--partly because of this atavistic nominally white on white racism.

I understand historically why in the US the paradigm of racist supremacy is White/Black (Colored), but that paradigm does not apply universally (especially if you're Chinese in the clutches of Japan's imperialism). This clarification has been a losing battle for me in the US but, I can't forget the holocaust of Slavs in Europe because of what was, after all, even in Hitler, an expression of Anglo-Saxon supremacy.

H2
H3
H4
3 columns
2 columns
1 column
Join the conversation now