My family is Lebanese. My grandfather spoke Lebarabic, English, French, and Spanish. He had paintings from Britain, France, and Japan. Soaps and clothing from Britain, food from France. Mahogany tables and desks from North Africa, carpets from Persia, tea from China. He lived in Egypt for many years and adopted the accent, though he preferred the British side of the country's nature. He was a self-taught historian just like myself, devouring knowledge from many different perspectives, about ancient history, WWII, and everything in between. He listened to classicals from Russia, Germany, and France. Although Lebanon is a Middle Eastern country, he was the most classically western man I had ever known. Of course he loved his own culture and spoke the language, travelled there quite often. But I suppose that was a pre-Arabic culture of Lebanon, when it was more Christian than Muslim.
I plan to honor him and continue this legacy, especially as I'm likely inheriting many of his items as well. So what does /pol/ think of this? Am I still a dirtbag ay-rab, or is the culture superior to the ethnicity? Would you rather have me, or a redneck hick that is a pure aryan?
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkOSriYLlyo
>>136777750
>Am I still a dirtbag ay-rab
Yes.
>>136777750
The title was meant to be, "what do you think of internationalists?"
>>136777883
ethnically, I am inclined to agree. But what I am asking you is, what is more important? The culture or the ethnicity?
> note I said ethnicity, not race
Would you rather live in a world similar to that of the old days, a classical Europe like in your most romantic dreams, except the people are all ethnically more like Greeks and Italians than nords? Or a pure white Europe full of degenerates that listen to rap, EDM, and have no care for conservatism?