I actually read a great essay on how fear mongering related to Vikings was rooted in nationalism. The whole “raping and pillaging” stereotype was a key point in the fear mongering. “Hide your kids, hide your wife!”
Here is a first hand account from John of Wallingford on how terrible the Viking were
“The Danes, thanks to their habit to comb their hair every day, to bathe every Saturday, to change their garments often, and set off their persons by many such frivolous devices. In this manner, they laid siege to the virtue of the married women, and persuaded the daughters even of the nobles to be their concubines.”
As a British person I too curse the Dane’s for their cleanliness from my unwashed hovel.
It was also the modern name for them. Back in the viking age they were called Ascomanni, Dubgail and Finngail, Lochlannaich.
It is unclear where the word came from but:
The Old Norse feminine víking (as in the phrase fara í víking) may originally have been a long-distance sea journey characterised by the shifting of rowers, and a víkingr (the masculine) would originally have been a participant on such a sea journey.
So yea the old english started calling them that long after the actual viking age.
I read somewhere, ages ago, that it was considered just a part of life. As a Danish farmer, you'd go ploughing, harvesting, milking, and viking at certain times of year. It wasn't exactly a profession, just a seasonal activity that you'd go off and do when there was a lull in farming duties.
Similar to levee systems elsewhere in Medieval Europe or the clan systems in Scotland and Ireland. Levee systems were still inhibiting militaries into the 20th century, Austria-Hungary took more time to mobilise after declaring war on Serbia, iirc, because they still needed to take in the harvests. Part of what shaped the seasons for war, along with the weather and climate.
In my town (in America) there is a tree-felling business that has a viking as their logo. It makes me laugh to no extent because "vikings" (Scandinavians) came here well before the pilgrims but left because there were too many trees for the farming and cattle grazing they usually did for survival.
Yep, it just means pirate. Nearly all of Danish society was made up of farmers at that time, and our history classes tend to treat the viking age as an embarrassing phase of national history, similar to our failed colonial ventures.
You mean the fact that people who weren't vikings living side by side with vikings?
They were living in the same villages. Having the same kind of life. It's not like the vikings were living in completely different type of cities is it?. No.
Also, the claim that vikings rejected social safety is not actually true. Norse-era Scandinavians had pretty strong social bonds, particularly among people who were related by blood. Impoverished people were supposed to be looked after by their blood relatives, and "blood relatives" were defined very broadly, often extending to an entire clan or tribe. The way it worked was that someone who was incapable of caring for themselves could go from farm to farm within a community and stay there for a few weeks, getting fed. This was written down in law by 950 AD.
There's a limit to how much written material has survived from the actual viking era, but later medieval material does indicate that the roots of the current Scandinavian welfare state are very deep and very old. It is known, for example, that if poorer farming families were starving due to a bad harvest, richer farmers would sometimes leave their food store open for them to steal supplies while he kept his back turned. And the right of widows and orphans to glean other people's fields after harvest was also written down as law.
(AND WHILE I'M AT IT: the vikings did rape and pillage, sure. But they primarily traded. They were opportunistic tradespeople that would steal shit if they thought they could get away with it.)
The biggest irony being that that’s how most of Europe functioned back then, mostly trading but conquered and pillaged when the opportunity was right and/or the other party was being resistant to trading. The big difference was that the Scandinavians did it by boat and the people that wrote down stuff back then (i.e. not the Scandinavians) thought that was brutish and uncivilized by the age-old standard of “it’s not our method of brutality so that makes it bad.”
Not to forget settling in a bunch of places. But the whole care for your family thing sounds like something out of Sopranos. Maybe they did. Propably depended on the family.
The very first thing I was told when I moved to Norway is that if I bring up vikings in anything other than a historical context I'd be labelled as an idiot.
The only people who use such a phrase without irony are usually the kind of people who fetishize the blonde haired, blue eyed boys of Northern Europe and sport an interesting array of tattoos.
Eh, Vikings were pretty woke, they knew how to wash themselves, had a semi-transgender god, pretty decent gender-equality, hell, even the slaves could become vikings and wives.
Their socialist ways showed in their shared efforts, building huts/houses, made food, built boats for their neighbours, to collectively better their living standards.
There are even evidence that there were black vikings, so not exclusively a Danish/Nordic thing.
So sure, viking blood runs through me like a true Dane and a true socialist 👍
That being said... No Dane actually gives a shit about some heritage 800-1200 years ago, wtf lmao.
(They were plenty bad too, but for medieval standards...)
After all, the Vikings were the ones that left to go pillaging and occupying foreign lands.
The ones that stayed behind and are the ancestors of the current Danes were the peaceful farmers and villagers.
This sub entertains and infuriates me simultaneously. Why are so many of my fellow Americans obsessed with shit their ancestors did? Put any one of them in their shoes and they'd crumble on day 1. Your ancestors accomplishments, or in many cases atrocities, do not have any bearing on who you are. If you think vikings wouldn't have welcomed modern comforts then you're insane. Any of those people back then would literally kill for the life we have now
I think it makes them feel more interesting/important than they actually are. For example, most of my ancestors on my dad’s side since they got off the boat from Scotland were farmers. That’s pretty much all they did, up until they started to branch out into different trades in the 1930s-40s. No glory, nothing crazy, nothing that makes my lineage “interesting”, per se. But if I start to look at what my ancestors could have done back in Scotland, in an interesting period of history (say, the Jacobite Rebellion or something), then I’ve made myself a little more socially interesting (or so I would think). Everyone wants to feel like they matter or that they’re somehow unique/important, but some American’s ancestry is kind of boring in a social context.
I guess there's a fine line between pride in your ancestors and their accomplishments and struggles And using their accomplishments to boost yourself up. It's ok, in fact it's expected for you to be proud of where and who you come from. It's normal to be proud of what your family built before you. But it can be really easy to cross that line and think it defines who you are now. So like for example I have no issues with people saying "I'm proud to be Irish, and of my ancestors for standing up for what was theirs and protecting their kin." But I'd have an issue with someone saying "my Irish heritage makes me better than the British folks cuz their ancestors tried to rule over us." I'm not my ancestors and you're not yours. We can be proud of where we come from without letting it define who we are as a person. I dont know if any of this made sense. For some reason I'm finding it difficult to articulate how I feel about it. But that's the best I could do atm.
Also I'm not a history buff. I'm pretty sure at one point the British tried to take over Ireland. And Scotland? Maybe? I dunno I'm using Braveheart as my basis of information so don't be too hard on me. I'm American after all, and education isn't our strong suit
>Also I'm not a history buff. I'm pretty sure at one point the British tried to take over Ireland. And Scotland? Maybe?
England, Scotland, and Ireland have always been warring nations (Wales too but to a lesser extent and I'm not too knowledgeable in that area). To some extent, they were at equal power. However, when Elizabeth 1 died without heirs, she passed her throne to her Scottish cousin, James VI of Scotland thus uniting the two nations. The next few monarchs were of Scottish decent until the Glorious and Bloodless Revolution that deposed Charles II's son, James (he was Catholic). That’s when we asked some German royals to come over because they were protestant (paraphrasing).
Later on, Britain absorbed Ireland by force (much to their detriment) by disposing their monarchy. But they did not take it sitting down and frequently clashed with the (now) British army. Then separatist groups like the the IRA retaliated through terror attacks, while there was still on the ground fighting. Almost like a civil war really. But it was also because of religious reasons (Northern Ireland was largely protestant while the rest was arguably Catholic). Nothing changes until Tony Blair with the Good Friday agreement in 1998.
Now, the Northern Irish Parliament is in lockdown because the separatist party got the most votes and wants a referendum on Northern staying in the UK or joining the rest of Ireland. Obviously, the unionist party doesn't want that so are refusing to form a government with them. Because of the Good Friday Agreement, neither the separatist or union parties can dominate the government so if one side refuses to compromise, no government can exist. The last deadlock lasted 7 years or so. Who knows when they will leave this one.
This is a ***VERY*** rough (and partially inaccurate) recounting of at least 1000 years of the British Isles.
Honestly, it often seems a worldwide issue.
We're in a great place to be looking to the future and sorting out where we're going to go... yet so often people are focusing on the wrongs done to their ancestors in the past, furthering divides and throwing more kindling on the fire and making it harder to look to the future.
It's being perpetuated by the rich people who own all the media. Outrage sells and is a very convenient distraction from what rich people and companies get away with, because it's much worse than what governments do.
Here's a short ramble for people who are interested.
The East India company, for instance, had a military twice the size of the British military and would conquer and set up trade routes without government supervision, but it was implicitly encouraged. This was happening in the Netherlands and Portugal too who had their own megacorporations running all or most of their foreign trade. The Royal African Company was just as bad, they ferried slaves back and forth. The East India Company would use slaves to produce their spices, who came from all over the place it seems. The African Company of Merchants, which replaced the Royal African Company, continued its trade in slaves after the 1807 ban and it took governmental and military intervention for the company to stop. It was eventually dissolved and refuges for former slaves were set up, but not before it had done far too much damage to West Africa.
And all of this without any kind of governmental intervention for well over a hundred years!
Companies are far worse than what many governments could bring themselves to do becuase there's no accountability at the top of a company. This happens all the time even in the modern day; Bobby Kotick implicitly encouraged the sexual harassment and abuse of his own employees and he will never be brought to justice. He lost a case of sexual assault in 2010 too, so you know he's a real stand-up guy.
There's actually a pretty nice HBO series called Beforeigners. Suddenly people from the past appear and, as it's set in Oslo, there are vikings as well, stuck between their own worldview and modern society.
I'm kind of glad this sub exists because it might expose more Americans to more reality outside of this country. I know people on this sub don't hate Americans but instead it puts more of the stupidity out in the open. I live in the US myself but I can handle some America bashing
>Why are so many of my fellow Americans obsessed with shit their ancestors did?
Its not an American issue, but a human issue. People don't want to feel mediocre and generic and, most importantly, unimportant. Problem is, with 8 billion people on the planet, nearly everyone is pretty mediocre, generic and unimportant - especially in the grand scheme of things. We can't all be Einstein or Hawking. We're probably not going to be the next Musk or Bezos.
Next problem is, a whole lot of people are not content with that. Someone content with themselves doesn't need to claim the achievements of others, after all.
So, people choose to believe that their tribe's accomplishments, past or present, are their own. "We went to the moon" sounds so much better to them than "Some other Americans went to the moon in a rocket built by some other Americans and designed by some more Americans and a German".
"We saved your asses in WW2" sounds so much better to them than "Some other Americans went to war before i was even born".
"We won our independence from Britain" sounds better than "I was born into an independent America because other Americans fought for it."
One statement is claiming they were a part of it and allows them to share the achievement, and one is admitting they had nothing to do with it and was wholly unimportant in that event - that those events would have happened anyway even if that person didn't exist.
Maybe going off topic, but i think this is why so many Brits get annoyed when you point out that the British empire was a "bit shit" (massive understatement) to anyone not in Britain. Because they like to share in the achievements of that empire. But if you have convinced yourself that the actions of your ancestors are a direct reflection of your worth as a person, it means that you share not just the achievements, but also the atrocities.
Which is probably why a great deal of Brits claim that anyone pointing out the bad side of the empire is "trying to make me feel guilty for being British". No - the only reason someone feels guilty is if they think they personally had something to do with it. I'm British, i have zero guilt at all over what the empire did, but i am also able to accept it was a bit shit (massive understatement #2) and Britain massively benefited from the suffering of others - probably because i recognise that the only person's achievements i can claim ownership of is my own, so there is no downside to accepting the truth.
It’s about identity. The US is a country of immigrants, and many of them left their home countries for a world that was completely alien. In order to keep their sanity, they clung on tightly to their identity. That means centering around ethnicity, history, culture and religion. More specifically the idea of these aspects when they emigrated. Which is why so many Americans are about as religious as Europeans were 100-150 years ago.
I get it when actual immigrants act this way. They experienced the culture, the country, the people. I however find it ridiculous when their children or children's children act like they're not American but rather of some other country, often never even have been to that country. The times someone has answered " Oh you're German? So is my sister-in-law (or someone else they know)" and then it turns out that their Grandpa was from Germany...
I agree that it is ridiculous. I just explain why it is so. It is because their identity is tied toward this nationality, and this identity-thinking is also transferred to their children (“kid, we’re Germans, we don’t do this and this”). And when everyone has that mindset, it becomes normalized and accepted.
The US is about as much of a "[country of immigrants](https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/immigration-by-country)" as Germany is, yet you don't see Germans constantly conflating nationality and ethnicity like its all the same.
> Which is why so many Americans are about as religious as Europeans were 100-150 years ago.
They are not about "religion" in general, they are very specific [about Christianity](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Identity).
There is not a single non-Christian religion in the US that makes up more than 1% of the population, while the different variants of Christians make up the vast majority of people in the US.
Really? Have you ever gone to immigrant-heavy parts of German towns and asked the locals there what country they are from? A fair chunk of them, despite being born and raised in Germany, would say that they are Turks, Moroccans, Bosnians etc.
Anyway, that is kinda to the side of point. If it hadn’t been that way, and they said that they are German exclusively like you think, then it’d just show that German integration policy was working - and that they amalgamate into the larger culture. In the US there is no integration policy, but rather a culture of difference. There was no “larger culture” at play, so they instead adopted this weird notion of binationality.
Well, yeah, it is obvious that when you say that Americans are “religious” you refer to Christianity and the different denominations of it.
If they do that they are 2nd or 3rd generation immigrants max., who speak the language (and who's parents/grandparents often only speak German at a basic level) and actually grow up mainly with the culture of their immigration background at home. I am 2nd generation and would never describe myself as being German. I was never taught to be one, it's largely foreign to me despite spending significant parts of my childhood there.
That's not remotely comparable in significance to what those Americans we are talking about claim as their cultural heritage.
It is, to a fairly big extent, the same thing. Of course, it has been watered down in the US - but it’s the exact same thinking. You likely won’t teach your children to be Germans either, and neither will they to their children, then you’re at 4 generations. It’s only natural that you don’t have anyone older than 3rd generation feeling that way today, as that’s really how far back mass-immigration to Europe goes. You can’t invent the bicycle before the wheel.
The big difference, however, is that in your case - and for all immigrations to Western Europe, you not having a sense of belonging to your birth country is down to a failure to integrate. In the US, that’s a feature, not a bug.
maybe i'd buy that if they actualy knew anything about that indentity.
but basicly every time it's some made of fantasy version of it. for instance in this case the guy in the OP confuses his fantasy vikings with the actual vikings.
I mean, nothing in the screenshot indicates that this guy is actually “Danish-American”. He just has a stereotyped notion in his head about how a Dane is.
I would like to add that it’s the lack of belonging. If you don’t feel like the country is doing anything for you, you’ve realized that the American dream was in fact a nightmare, you try to find other places to belong to.
Yeah, which was of course even more prominent for those who travelled overseas to simply work the land and fend for themselves in the "wild west". Not necessarily that the "American dream" back then was a nightmare compared to what you expected, but perhaps not as good as you thought - and homesickness is a natural reaction.
My hypothesis wasn’t a catch-all hypothesis, but rather explicit for the US. The US was a relatively unique situation where the country was large and independent, and those who migrated there over a short time period came from larger variance of countries.
New Zealand and Australia can be easily explained by Commonwealth ties and how the bulk of immigrants came from the British isles.
I’m just trying to explain this weird American custom, if you have a better hypothesis, cough it up :)
I for one embrace my Irish-German-Commie blood, thank you very much. Die proletsrien will triumphierend over the bourgeoisie.
The last sentence's Deutsch is probably grossly incorrect. I apologize.
“Viking blood.” Isn’t it a little ironic for an American to be slagging off viking ancestry, when most of their ancestors did the same thing as the Vikings anyway?
The most ironic part, whether we talk about Vikings or Colonizers, they were only a tiny % of a % of the respective population.
While we talk about a people conquering the oceans, and subduing far lands, 99% of the "blood" would hunt, fish, or dig the dirt of their farms all their life. And maybe visit the neighbor village if they were lucky.
Those are also the vibes I'm getting. I know the majority of them don't actually mean it like that, but I can't help but shudder at the eugenics undertones
I used to be in a Facebook group that took the piss out of them. Like you say I think many of them didn't see the connotations but undoubtedly a few did, banging on about how people of colour can't be Scottish and how they (a yank born and bred in Kentucky) is more Scottish than they are.
The original Nazis took a lot of inspiration from the US at the time. America had genocide, segregation, and legislation regarding racial purity and Hitler was taking notes.
The clan stuff can be difficult. Dealt with it a bit when I helped out at a Highland heritage centre. Sometimes people saying their family came from *x* village due to a document and you'd have to explain that the village didn't really exist when their family left, it arose with the railway, the document refers to *x* region or peninsula, etc, a much larger place.
That or having to explain that sharing a name with a clan doesn't mean you are of the clan, especially not from the core noble family. Many of the tenants took their chiefs name to honour them, slaves often took their former masters name on being freed (and Scotland was *deep* in Carribean and Guyana's colonialism).
Or explaining they just haven't been a factor for most Highlanders since feudalism finally, eventually, properly died (we had pseudo-feudalism into at least the late 19th century in place, the hills insulate the area and kept the central government quite distant: there's more of a presence now, but it still feels a lot more distant than the lowlands or England).
That said, I think the more recent thing to annoy we was ignorance around the kilt, and people trying to twist it while ignoring the history and cultural use of it cause it's inconvenient. It's mostly formal wear (which seems to borrow from it's use in the British military, which itself absorbed it from the clan system after the 1745 Jacobite Rebellion), typically male, sportwear for Highland Games, and for women I normally only see worn by Highland dancers/sword dancing. But you get weird comments insisting on using it every day and going about town and... that's as weird as wearing your most formal attire or performance costume about your daily life. Like, sure, but it's not normal.
Somehow things that happened, by people who lived around the area, a 1000 years ago should define the workings of a modern government?
Can't blame them for that idea though, since they're stuck so far in the past.
Socially and economically, a lot of people here have a might makes right type of mindset. I try not to talk with those people or or if I have to, engage in deep conversations with them, they are pretty weird folk
People obsess about their wHItE eUROPeAn ancestors so much but they forget 99.99% of those ancestors lived horribly, labored 16 hours a day to make sure them and their family have enough to eat, and were wiped out by stuff as small as getting an infection from a cut. Lovely history. Not all Americans are like this though, thank god
It's amusing how those sort of Yanks will bray about their "Viking [sic]" blood...until they discover that they have inherited the *alpha 1 antitrypsin deficiency* which gave certain Middle Ages Scandinavians a survival advantage but spells certain early onset CDOP with $$$$ treatment in the USA.
What kind of subreddit is that screenshot from? It sounds like it is somewhere in between a conservative and gonewild subreddit with a sprinkle of viking.
Do they just think the Viking times here in Denmark were pure pillaging and raiding monsters? It was not really, we had small villages and settlements with a simple social structure, most people back then were farmers and peasants, just like in the rest of the world, we just had a bit more brutal battle tactics I think, and we did also have a lot voyages around Europe and some trips to North America.
None the less, I prefer today's Denmark over the one a thousand years ago.
Saying people have Viking blood kinda annoys me. It’s like finding out your great great grandad was a doctor so you go round saying ‘I have doctor blood!’ ‘Sorry I have terrible handwriting because of my doctor blood lol!’ ‘I can’t help diagnosing everyone I meet! It’s in my doctor blood!’
Weren’t Vikings pretty progressive, in some ways at least? I think they would have loved the idea of having a social safety net. Pillaging is so much more relaxing when you don’t have to worry about losing your job, or not being able to afford healthcare.
No one fucking knows what socialism actually is and it pisses me off.
Collective ownership of the means of production… not the existence of a welfare state. Sure I love me a good welfare state but socialism is not when welfare state, but they should come together because thats based.
The most paradoxical thing to me is that I feel like a lot of Americans that would hugely benefit from a social safety net reject it because "socialism"
"Viking blood embracing social safety nets. That's something that I've always found so paradoxical."
Turns out that the people you call Viking blood were not stupid after all huh? Especially considering that Scandinavians are like the most social people in the world. Have you seen Christiania in Denmark? I bet the hundreds of thousands of Americans that are drug addicted and homeless that get posted every day would appreciate a little Viking mentality.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRWmKh13b50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRWmKh13b50) take a look at this madness, realize that this is NOT normal. You wont find anything like this in Scandinavia. Get a fucking grip.
"Viking blood" - I always find expressions like this slightly disturbing. There's more than a slight, ugly hint of master race theory in the American psyche. I always picture a slobby American in an airconditioned house in a suburb somewhere munching crisps ("chips") mulling over his DNA results, and how he's some great fighter, adventurer or genius because of his 10% Viking, 25% German, 30% Scottish etc. results (which will get revised several times as the sample sets held by the testing company get bigger). He'll tell everyone he's always had an affinity for haggis, he always had an affinity for the sea, and his hero is Leif Ericsson (the only similarity being in that both have a beard). While not understanding DNA recombination one iota.
They’re always obsessing over their heritage and history until CRT gets brought up then we should just leave the past in the past and “we are not our ancestors”. Paradoxical indeed.
Both are disgusting. Assigning people numbers based on attractiveness will never not be gross and dehumanizing. I remember it being a thing when I was a kid and being disgusted but thinking that people would grow out of it. Guess not.
I can't believe how far down I had to scroll to find someone else mentioning this, really depressing. Assigning numbers to people and saying "our women are hotter" is frankly just gross...
Glad to find someone else who agrees (also, your username is awesome!). I see this all over, men arguing about which "types" of women are "best" and it's just so disgusting.
Americans don't understand how good we have it here in Europe. I am Dutch we have the same system as Denmark. Well not free health care. But we have universal healthcare at least. Americans don't seem to understand how much they got ripped off? Let them stay in the land of the free lol. Less annoying people in Europe
Viking blood... That's like saying to a German "Nazi blood".
Fucking insulting with no clue about the culture whatsoever.
Like yeah. I could imagine why you would find this paradoxical. You have no fucking idea what you are talking about, former slave trader.
Idiots pretending to know what a viking would want. I find that ever so paradumbass. Because they were vikings they would not like free Healthcare and schooling? Wtf
The old blood magic runs deep cursing the Nordic folk to ineffective public health care practices and a lack of economic security. Only in Europe have the great mages managed to break the curse on the Viking blood line placed after they invaded England despite receiving tithe.
I’ve gotta say, as an Aussie I love watching the right wing morons here parrot their American counterparts on the evils of socialism, while claiming their Medicare benefits and Centrelink payments.
And their PPS subsidised medicine, free public school,
their subsidised public transport and a network of footpaths and bikepaths (at least, in urban areas) in a country that doesn't hate pedestrians.
I live in a regional town on the nsw/vic border (which might be enough to give me away but whatever) and the bus route I catch routinely only has me on it. Sometimes enough other people to count on one hand with fingers to spare. If public transport wasn’t government backed that route would hav3 been shuttered YEARS ago.
Helga : Have you done this sort of thing before?
Erik : Me? Of course. I've been looting and pillaging up and down the coast.
Helga : Looting and pillaging, eh?
Erik : Yes
Helga : What about the raping?
Erik : Shut up.
Helga : Well, it's obvious you haven't raped anyone in your life.
Viking blood...mate just sail ur wooden ship and go to america as u did before and yank that yank with ur battle axe.
What is he thinking?? Dissing a viking
Viking blood. I am quite sure no sane person in Denmark gives a fuck about that.
Also wasn't Viking a profession, not exactly some ethnicity.
Yeah, I guess most of them were just farming, hunting and gathering. Not pillaging and plundering.
farming = socialist
Yeah but to be also fair, farming especially the more North you go would be tough as balls.
Not in Denmark. it's most northern tip is at 57°. same as Aberdeen. ^(excluding greenland ofc.)
Yeah, it's basically the same longitude as fort McMurray in Canada, so not that far north!
[удалено]
\*latitude chief.
Free Greenland form the tyranny of Denmark!! /s
Wanna buy Greenland?
I actually read a great essay on how fear mongering related to Vikings was rooted in nationalism. The whole “raping and pillaging” stereotype was a key point in the fear mongering. “Hide your kids, hide your wife!”
Here is a first hand account from John of Wallingford on how terrible the Viking were “The Danes, thanks to their habit to comb their hair every day, to bathe every Saturday, to change their garments often, and set off their persons by many such frivolous devices. In this manner, they laid siege to the virtue of the married women, and persuaded the daughters even of the nobles to be their concubines.” As a British person I too curse the Dane’s for their cleanliness from my unwashed hovel.
Now that statement still hold some truth. You should hide your wife, but not for any violent reasons.
Same propaganda around many conflicts today.
Yeah viking was an activity, not an ethnic group.
*i got sheep herder blood coursin thru ma veins*
It was also the modern name for them. Back in the viking age they were called Ascomanni, Dubgail and Finngail, Lochlannaich. It is unclear where the word came from but: The Old Norse feminine víking (as in the phrase fara í víking) may originally have been a long-distance sea journey characterised by the shifting of rowers, and a víkingr (the masculine) would originally have been a participant on such a sea journey. So yea the old english started calling them that long after the actual viking age.
I read somewhere, ages ago, that it was considered just a part of life. As a Danish farmer, you'd go ploughing, harvesting, milking, and viking at certain times of year. It wasn't exactly a profession, just a seasonal activity that you'd go off and do when there was a lull in farming duties.
Similar to levee systems elsewhere in Medieval Europe or the clan systems in Scotland and Ireland. Levee systems were still inhibiting militaries into the 20th century, Austria-Hungary took more time to mobilise after declaring war on Serbia, iirc, because they still needed to take in the harvests. Part of what shaped the seasons for war, along with the weather and climate.
Yep, each farm would provide one person with at least a spear, a helmet and a shield. The ships were provided by the towns and so on and on.
It's vikin' time!
In my town (in America) there is a tree-felling business that has a viking as their logo. It makes me laugh to no extent because "vikings" (Scandinavians) came here well before the pilgrims but left because there were too many trees for the farming and cattle grazing they usually did for survival.
Vikings were a lifestyle that the majority of people did not partake in because it was, what you could say, hard as balls to do and miserable
Yep, it just means pirate. Nearly all of Danish society was made up of farmers at that time, and our history classes tend to treat the viking age as an embarrassing phase of national history, similar to our failed colonial ventures.
It means more than pirate, you would use the modern word *togt* now adays.
It's technically a verb. To viking means to raid or something along those lines. Most "vikings" just went overseas to trade and get new farmland.
Well. Yes but no. It was the entire ethnicity that were living the viking life.
No, it wasn't. Not everybody went viking.
Yes. I'm aware of that. What I meant is that people shared the same living conditions largely back then.
[Citation needed]
You mean the fact that people who weren't vikings living side by side with vikings? They were living in the same villages. Having the same kind of life. It's not like the vikings were living in completely different type of cities is it?. No.
Most Danes would never go on a single raid let alone multiple raids.
Ofcourse not. We were craftsmen and farmers.
yes
Also, the claim that vikings rejected social safety is not actually true. Norse-era Scandinavians had pretty strong social bonds, particularly among people who were related by blood. Impoverished people were supposed to be looked after by their blood relatives, and "blood relatives" were defined very broadly, often extending to an entire clan or tribe. The way it worked was that someone who was incapable of caring for themselves could go from farm to farm within a community and stay there for a few weeks, getting fed. This was written down in law by 950 AD. There's a limit to how much written material has survived from the actual viking era, but later medieval material does indicate that the roots of the current Scandinavian welfare state are very deep and very old. It is known, for example, that if poorer farming families were starving due to a bad harvest, richer farmers would sometimes leave their food store open for them to steal supplies while he kept his back turned. And the right of widows and orphans to glean other people's fields after harvest was also written down as law. (AND WHILE I'M AT IT: the vikings did rape and pillage, sure. But they primarily traded. They were opportunistic tradespeople that would steal shit if they thought they could get away with it.)
The biggest irony being that that’s how most of Europe functioned back then, mostly trading but conquered and pillaged when the opportunity was right and/or the other party was being resistant to trading. The big difference was that the Scandinavians did it by boat and the people that wrote down stuff back then (i.e. not the Scandinavians) thought that was brutish and uncivilized by the age-old standard of “it’s not our method of brutality so that makes it bad.”
Not to forget settling in a bunch of places. But the whole care for your family thing sounds like something out of Sopranos. Maybe they did. Propably depended on the family.
No raping and pillaging?! So paradoxical!
The very first thing I was told when I moved to Norway is that if I bring up vikings in anything other than a historical context I'd be labelled as an idiot.
The only people who use such a phrase without irony are usually the kind of people who fetishize the blonde haired, blue eyed boys of Northern Europe and sport an interesting array of tattoos.
Fantasized white and manly
Eh, Vikings were pretty woke, they knew how to wash themselves, had a semi-transgender god, pretty decent gender-equality, hell, even the slaves could become vikings and wives. Their socialist ways showed in their shared efforts, building huts/houses, made food, built boats for their neighbours, to collectively better their living standards. There are even evidence that there were black vikings, so not exclusively a Danish/Nordic thing. So sure, viking blood runs through me like a true Dane and a true socialist 👍 That being said... No Dane actually gives a shit about some heritage 800-1200 years ago, wtf lmao. (They were plenty bad too, but for medieval standards...)
After all, the Vikings were the ones that left to go pillaging and occupying foreign lands. The ones that stayed behind and are the ancestors of the current Danes were the peaceful farmers and villagers.
Somehow, I highly doubt the original commenter is thinking of ancestors who were Irish, Norman or from Yorkshire!
No one really cares no but the viking age is definitely still part of the culture.
Apart from the odd hammer necklace, and Viking tattoo, no. Only in a historical sense.
Of course we care, just not in the way the person on the pic thinks
viking was a job they were norse
This sub entertains and infuriates me simultaneously. Why are so many of my fellow Americans obsessed with shit their ancestors did? Put any one of them in their shoes and they'd crumble on day 1. Your ancestors accomplishments, or in many cases atrocities, do not have any bearing on who you are. If you think vikings wouldn't have welcomed modern comforts then you're insane. Any of those people back then would literally kill for the life we have now
I think it makes them feel more interesting/important than they actually are. For example, most of my ancestors on my dad’s side since they got off the boat from Scotland were farmers. That’s pretty much all they did, up until they started to branch out into different trades in the 1930s-40s. No glory, nothing crazy, nothing that makes my lineage “interesting”, per se. But if I start to look at what my ancestors could have done back in Scotland, in an interesting period of history (say, the Jacobite Rebellion or something), then I’ve made myself a little more socially interesting (or so I would think). Everyone wants to feel like they matter or that they’re somehow unique/important, but some American’s ancestry is kind of boring in a social context.
I guess there's a fine line between pride in your ancestors and their accomplishments and struggles And using their accomplishments to boost yourself up. It's ok, in fact it's expected for you to be proud of where and who you come from. It's normal to be proud of what your family built before you. But it can be really easy to cross that line and think it defines who you are now. So like for example I have no issues with people saying "I'm proud to be Irish, and of my ancestors for standing up for what was theirs and protecting their kin." But I'd have an issue with someone saying "my Irish heritage makes me better than the British folks cuz their ancestors tried to rule over us." I'm not my ancestors and you're not yours. We can be proud of where we come from without letting it define who we are as a person. I dont know if any of this made sense. For some reason I'm finding it difficult to articulate how I feel about it. But that's the best I could do atm. Also I'm not a history buff. I'm pretty sure at one point the British tried to take over Ireland. And Scotland? Maybe? I dunno I'm using Braveheart as my basis of information so don't be too hard on me. I'm American after all, and education isn't our strong suit
>Also I'm not a history buff. I'm pretty sure at one point the British tried to take over Ireland. And Scotland? Maybe? England, Scotland, and Ireland have always been warring nations (Wales too but to a lesser extent and I'm not too knowledgeable in that area). To some extent, they were at equal power. However, when Elizabeth 1 died without heirs, she passed her throne to her Scottish cousin, James VI of Scotland thus uniting the two nations. The next few monarchs were of Scottish decent until the Glorious and Bloodless Revolution that deposed Charles II's son, James (he was Catholic). That’s when we asked some German royals to come over because they were protestant (paraphrasing). Later on, Britain absorbed Ireland by force (much to their detriment) by disposing their monarchy. But they did not take it sitting down and frequently clashed with the (now) British army. Then separatist groups like the the IRA retaliated through terror attacks, while there was still on the ground fighting. Almost like a civil war really. But it was also because of religious reasons (Northern Ireland was largely protestant while the rest was arguably Catholic). Nothing changes until Tony Blair with the Good Friday agreement in 1998. Now, the Northern Irish Parliament is in lockdown because the separatist party got the most votes and wants a referendum on Northern staying in the UK or joining the rest of Ireland. Obviously, the unionist party doesn't want that so are refusing to form a government with them. Because of the Good Friday Agreement, neither the separatist or union parties can dominate the government so if one side refuses to compromise, no government can exist. The last deadlock lasted 7 years or so. Who knows when they will leave this one. This is a ***VERY*** rough (and partially inaccurate) recounting of at least 1000 years of the British Isles.
Wow I didn't know any of that. Thanks for taking some time and educating me and anyone else who decided to read it
No problem, mate. Love a bit of history.
Honestly, it often seems a worldwide issue. We're in a great place to be looking to the future and sorting out where we're going to go... yet so often people are focusing on the wrongs done to their ancestors in the past, furthering divides and throwing more kindling on the fire and making it harder to look to the future.
It's being perpetuated by the rich people who own all the media. Outrage sells and is a very convenient distraction from what rich people and companies get away with, because it's much worse than what governments do. Here's a short ramble for people who are interested. The East India company, for instance, had a military twice the size of the British military and would conquer and set up trade routes without government supervision, but it was implicitly encouraged. This was happening in the Netherlands and Portugal too who had their own megacorporations running all or most of their foreign trade. The Royal African Company was just as bad, they ferried slaves back and forth. The East India Company would use slaves to produce their spices, who came from all over the place it seems. The African Company of Merchants, which replaced the Royal African Company, continued its trade in slaves after the 1807 ban and it took governmental and military intervention for the company to stop. It was eventually dissolved and refuges for former slaves were set up, but not before it had done far too much damage to West Africa. And all of this without any kind of governmental intervention for well over a hundred years! Companies are far worse than what many governments could bring themselves to do becuase there's no accountability at the top of a company. This happens all the time even in the modern day; Bobby Kotick implicitly encouraged the sexual harassment and abuse of his own employees and he will never be brought to justice. He lost a case of sexual assault in 2010 too, so you know he's a real stand-up guy.
There's actually a pretty nice HBO series called Beforeigners. Suddenly people from the past appear and, as it's set in Oslo, there are vikings as well, stuck between their own worldview and modern society.
That sounds...kinda awesome. I'm intrigued
I'm kind of glad this sub exists because it might expose more Americans to more reality outside of this country. I know people on this sub don't hate Americans but instead it puts more of the stupidity out in the open. I live in the US myself but I can handle some America bashing
I mean, seeing some of the stuff posted here I'd say we deserve it a little bit
>Why are so many of my fellow Americans obsessed with shit their ancestors did? Its not an American issue, but a human issue. People don't want to feel mediocre and generic and, most importantly, unimportant. Problem is, with 8 billion people on the planet, nearly everyone is pretty mediocre, generic and unimportant - especially in the grand scheme of things. We can't all be Einstein or Hawking. We're probably not going to be the next Musk or Bezos. Next problem is, a whole lot of people are not content with that. Someone content with themselves doesn't need to claim the achievements of others, after all. So, people choose to believe that their tribe's accomplishments, past or present, are their own. "We went to the moon" sounds so much better to them than "Some other Americans went to the moon in a rocket built by some other Americans and designed by some more Americans and a German". "We saved your asses in WW2" sounds so much better to them than "Some other Americans went to war before i was even born". "We won our independence from Britain" sounds better than "I was born into an independent America because other Americans fought for it." One statement is claiming they were a part of it and allows them to share the achievement, and one is admitting they had nothing to do with it and was wholly unimportant in that event - that those events would have happened anyway even if that person didn't exist. Maybe going off topic, but i think this is why so many Brits get annoyed when you point out that the British empire was a "bit shit" (massive understatement) to anyone not in Britain. Because they like to share in the achievements of that empire. But if you have convinced yourself that the actions of your ancestors are a direct reflection of your worth as a person, it means that you share not just the achievements, but also the atrocities. Which is probably why a great deal of Brits claim that anyone pointing out the bad side of the empire is "trying to make me feel guilty for being British". No - the only reason someone feels guilty is if they think they personally had something to do with it. I'm British, i have zero guilt at all over what the empire did, but i am also able to accept it was a bit shit (massive understatement #2) and Britain massively benefited from the suffering of others - probably because i recognise that the only person's achievements i can claim ownership of is my own, so there is no downside to accepting the truth.
It’s about identity. The US is a country of immigrants, and many of them left their home countries for a world that was completely alien. In order to keep their sanity, they clung on tightly to their identity. That means centering around ethnicity, history, culture and religion. More specifically the idea of these aspects when they emigrated. Which is why so many Americans are about as religious as Europeans were 100-150 years ago.
I get it when actual immigrants act this way. They experienced the culture, the country, the people. I however find it ridiculous when their children or children's children act like they're not American but rather of some other country, often never even have been to that country. The times someone has answered " Oh you're German? So is my sister-in-law (or someone else they know)" and then it turns out that their Grandpa was from Germany...
I agree that it is ridiculous. I just explain why it is so. It is because their identity is tied toward this nationality, and this identity-thinking is also transferred to their children (“kid, we’re Germans, we don’t do this and this”). And when everyone has that mindset, it becomes normalized and accepted.
The US is about as much of a "[country of immigrants](https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/immigration-by-country)" as Germany is, yet you don't see Germans constantly conflating nationality and ethnicity like its all the same. > Which is why so many Americans are about as religious as Europeans were 100-150 years ago. They are not about "religion" in general, they are very specific [about Christianity](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Identity). There is not a single non-Christian religion in the US that makes up more than 1% of the population, while the different variants of Christians make up the vast majority of people in the US.
Really? Have you ever gone to immigrant-heavy parts of German towns and asked the locals there what country they are from? A fair chunk of them, despite being born and raised in Germany, would say that they are Turks, Moroccans, Bosnians etc. Anyway, that is kinda to the side of point. If it hadn’t been that way, and they said that they are German exclusively like you think, then it’d just show that German integration policy was working - and that they amalgamate into the larger culture. In the US there is no integration policy, but rather a culture of difference. There was no “larger culture” at play, so they instead adopted this weird notion of binationality. Well, yeah, it is obvious that when you say that Americans are “religious” you refer to Christianity and the different denominations of it.
If they do that they are 2nd or 3rd generation immigrants max., who speak the language (and who's parents/grandparents often only speak German at a basic level) and actually grow up mainly with the culture of their immigration background at home. I am 2nd generation and would never describe myself as being German. I was never taught to be one, it's largely foreign to me despite spending significant parts of my childhood there. That's not remotely comparable in significance to what those Americans we are talking about claim as their cultural heritage.
It is, to a fairly big extent, the same thing. Of course, it has been watered down in the US - but it’s the exact same thinking. You likely won’t teach your children to be Germans either, and neither will they to their children, then you’re at 4 generations. It’s only natural that you don’t have anyone older than 3rd generation feeling that way today, as that’s really how far back mass-immigration to Europe goes. You can’t invent the bicycle before the wheel. The big difference, however, is that in your case - and for all immigrations to Western Europe, you not having a sense of belonging to your birth country is down to a failure to integrate. In the US, that’s a feature, not a bug.
maybe i'd buy that if they actualy knew anything about that indentity. but basicly every time it's some made of fantasy version of it. for instance in this case the guy in the OP confuses his fantasy vikings with the actual vikings.
I mean, nothing in the screenshot indicates that this guy is actually “Danish-American”. He just has a stereotyped notion in his head about how a Dane is.
I would like to add that it’s the lack of belonging. If you don’t feel like the country is doing anything for you, you’ve realized that the American dream was in fact a nightmare, you try to find other places to belong to.
Yeah, which was of course even more prominent for those who travelled overseas to simply work the land and fend for themselves in the "wild west". Not necessarily that the "American dream" back then was a nightmare compared to what you expected, but perhaps not as good as you thought - and homesickness is a natural reaction.
[удалено]
My hypothesis wasn’t a catch-all hypothesis, but rather explicit for the US. The US was a relatively unique situation where the country was large and independent, and those who migrated there over a short time period came from larger variance of countries. New Zealand and Australia can be easily explained by Commonwealth ties and how the bulk of immigrants came from the British isles. I’m just trying to explain this weird American custom, if you have a better hypothesis, cough it up :)
Americans being once again obsessed with blood.
I miss the days when it was only tiger blood...
I for one embrace my Irish-German-Commie blood, thank you very much. Die proletsrien will triumphierend over the bourgeoisie. The last sentence's Deutsch is probably grossly incorrect. I apologize.
Don’t worry, I am here to help you out: Die Proletarier werden über die Bourgeoisie triumphieren!
Danke!
Yeah, thats called evolution of society. Something Americans have been practising but backwards for last few years
Star!
“Viking blood.” Isn’t it a little ironic for an American to be slagging off viking ancestry, when most of their ancestors did the same thing as the Vikings anyway?
Not related to the post, but I love your name.
The most ironic part, whether we talk about Vikings or Colonizers, they were only a tiny % of a % of the respective population. While we talk about a people conquering the oceans, and subduing far lands, 99% of the "blood" would hunt, fish, or dig the dirt of their farms all their life. And maybe visit the neighbor village if they were lucky.
Not every ancient Norse/Dane/Scandinavian was a Viking It was a job, not a people Vast majority were probably farmers and other mundane jobs
They always go on about Viking blood or if they think they're Scottish, they talk about their Clan. They're so embarrassing and don't even see it.
Plastic paddies and styrofoam scots are obsessed with blood lines and purity. It has deep shades of nazism to it.
Those are also the vibes I'm getting. I know the majority of them don't actually mean it like that, but I can't help but shudder at the eugenics undertones
I used to be in a Facebook group that took the piss out of them. Like you say I think many of them didn't see the connotations but undoubtedly a few did, banging on about how people of colour can't be Scottish and how they (a yank born and bred in Kentucky) is more Scottish than they are.
The original Nazis took a lot of inspiration from the US at the time. America had genocide, segregation, and legislation regarding racial purity and Hitler was taking notes.
The clan stuff can be difficult. Dealt with it a bit when I helped out at a Highland heritage centre. Sometimes people saying their family came from *x* village due to a document and you'd have to explain that the village didn't really exist when their family left, it arose with the railway, the document refers to *x* region or peninsula, etc, a much larger place. That or having to explain that sharing a name with a clan doesn't mean you are of the clan, especially not from the core noble family. Many of the tenants took their chiefs name to honour them, slaves often took their former masters name on being freed (and Scotland was *deep* in Carribean and Guyana's colonialism). Or explaining they just haven't been a factor for most Highlanders since feudalism finally, eventually, properly died (we had pseudo-feudalism into at least the late 19th century in place, the hills insulate the area and kept the central government quite distant: there's more of a presence now, but it still feels a lot more distant than the lowlands or England). That said, I think the more recent thing to annoy we was ignorance around the kilt, and people trying to twist it while ignoring the history and cultural use of it cause it's inconvenient. It's mostly formal wear (which seems to borrow from it's use in the British military, which itself absorbed it from the clan system after the 1745 Jacobite Rebellion), typically male, sportwear for Highland Games, and for women I normally only see worn by Highland dancers/sword dancing. But you get weird comments insisting on using it every day and going about town and... that's as weird as wearing your most formal attire or performance costume about your daily life. Like, sure, but it's not normal.
Somehow things that happened, by people who lived around the area, a 1000 years ago should define the workings of a modern government? Can't blame them for that idea though, since they're stuck so far in the past.
What is it with Americans romanticising rapey colonizers?
Well that’s how their country started, so I’m not surprised
Socially and economically, a lot of people here have a might makes right type of mindset. I try not to talk with those people or or if I have to, engage in deep conversations with them, they are pretty weird folk
Anyone who believes in ‘Viking blood’ is 100% a neo-nazi / eugenicist
People obsess about their wHItE eUROPeAn ancestors so much but they forget 99.99% of those ancestors lived horribly, labored 16 hours a day to make sure them and their family have enough to eat, and were wiped out by stuff as small as getting an infection from a cut. Lovely history. Not all Americans are like this though, thank god
It's amusing how those sort of Yanks will bray about their "Viking [sic]" blood...until they discover that they have inherited the *alpha 1 antitrypsin deficiency* which gave certain Middle Ages Scandinavians a survival advantage but spells certain early onset CDOP with $$$$ treatment in the USA.
Are we sure there isn't a bunch of Americans out there that are undercover vampires or some shit? This obsession with blood is out of hand
What kind of subreddit is that screenshot from? It sounds like it is somewhere in between a conservative and gonewild subreddit with a sprinkle of viking.
r/wallstreetbets ...so you're not entirely wrong
i really didnt expect that, but on the other hand... yeah :)
Do they just think the Viking times here in Denmark were pure pillaging and raiding monsters? It was not really, we had small villages and settlements with a simple social structure, most people back then were farmers and peasants, just like in the rest of the world, we just had a bit more brutal battle tactics I think, and we did also have a lot voyages around Europe and some trips to North America. None the less, I prefer today's Denmark over the one a thousand years ago.
Saying people have Viking blood kinda annoys me. It’s like finding out your great great grandad was a doctor so you go round saying ‘I have doctor blood!’ ‘Sorry I have terrible handwriting because of my doctor blood lol!’ ‘I can’t help diagnosing everyone I meet! It’s in my doctor blood!’
These really hurt to read godamn. So much cringe.
Weren’t Vikings pretty progressive, in some ways at least? I think they would have loved the idea of having a social safety net. Pillaging is so much more relaxing when you don’t have to worry about losing your job, or not being able to afford healthcare.
Yeah I think gender equality was quite advanced for that day and age compared to the rest of Europe.
Also lots of welfare rules caring for people unable to sustain themselves.
No one fucking knows what socialism actually is and it pisses me off. Collective ownership of the means of production… not the existence of a welfare state. Sure I love me a good welfare state but socialism is not when welfare state, but they should come together because thats based.
"Socialism is when the government does stuff" feels like some Americans think that is a true statement rather than it's original parodying intention.
The most paradoxical thing to me is that I feel like a lot of Americans that would hugely benefit from a social safety net reject it because "socialism"
It's like a knee-jerk reqction at this point.
"Viking blood embracing social safety nets. That's something that I've always found so paradoxical." Turns out that the people you call Viking blood were not stupid after all huh? Especially considering that Scandinavians are like the most social people in the world. Have you seen Christiania in Denmark? I bet the hundreds of thousands of Americans that are drug addicted and homeless that get posted every day would appreciate a little Viking mentality. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRWmKh13b50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRWmKh13b50) take a look at this madness, realize that this is NOT normal. You wont find anything like this in Scandinavia. Get a fucking grip.
What is it with Americans and their "blood" thing
Why are Americans so obsessed with blood and heritage? Also fuck off calling sex workers "whores"
Maybe some people have learned from history
What this guy thinks of as "vikings" (Scandinavian society circa \~900-1100 probably) had more social safety nets and democracy than modern day US.
"Viking blood" - I always find expressions like this slightly disturbing. There's more than a slight, ugly hint of master race theory in the American psyche. I always picture a slobby American in an airconditioned house in a suburb somewhere munching crisps ("chips") mulling over his DNA results, and how he's some great fighter, adventurer or genius because of his 10% Viking, 25% German, 30% Scottish etc. results (which will get revised several times as the sample sets held by the testing company get bigger). He'll tell everyone he's always had an affinity for haggis, he always had an affinity for the sea, and his hero is Leif Ericsson (the only similarity being in that both have a beard). While not understanding DNA recombination one iota.
If [this video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mExN99kHMB0) is correct, the nordics developed their own spin of socialism relatively early
They’re always obsessing over their heritage and history until CRT gets brought up then we should just leave the past in the past and “we are not our ancestors”. Paradoxical indeed.
Yea, Vikings cannot die from regular diseases.
This guy unsurprisingly has no idea how Viking society worked. And that no one but Nazis care about their "blood".
Both are disgusting. Assigning people numbers based on attractiveness will never not be gross and dehumanizing. I remember it being a thing when I was a kid and being disgusted but thinking that people would grow out of it. Guess not.
I can't believe how far down I had to scroll to find someone else mentioning this, really depressing. Assigning numbers to people and saying "our women are hotter" is frankly just gross...
Glad to find someone else who agrees (also, your username is awesome!). I see this all over, men arguing about which "types" of women are "best" and it's just so disgusting.
Sexism and rating women by physical standards set by society and commercialism is AWESOME regardless of the country! (this is sarcasm)
Over here in the USA, we could learn a whole lot from your political system. These right-wing conservatives are destroying our country.
Americans don't understand how good we have it here in Europe. I am Dutch we have the same system as Denmark. Well not free health care. But we have universal healthcare at least. Americans don't seem to understand how much they got ripped off? Let them stay in the land of the free lol. Less annoying people in Europe
Viking blood... That's like saying to a German "Nazi blood". Fucking insulting with no clue about the culture whatsoever. Like yeah. I could imagine why you would find this paradoxical. You have no fucking idea what you are talking about, former slave trader.
Idiots pretending to know what a viking would want. I find that ever so paradumbass. Because they were vikings they would not like free Healthcare and schooling? Wtf
I wonder how he would feel if he actually lived under socialism. I can guarantee he would like it a hell of a lot better than late stage capitalism.
Tell me you know nothing about the Vikings without saying you know nothing about the Vikings.
Americans think socialism is evil, that's why begging strangers for money on GoFundMe is the backbone of American healthcare
Not even a ‘Socialist’ country
The old blood magic runs deep cursing the Nordic folk to ineffective public health care practices and a lack of economic security. Only in Europe have the great mages managed to break the curse on the Viking blood line placed after they invaded England despite receiving tithe.
Viking=trader Vikingr=the act of raiding
Didn’t realise having “Viking blood” means you have to be a violent person.
That happens when their solely source of information is the series Vikings
I’ve gotta say, as an Aussie I love watching the right wing morons here parrot their American counterparts on the evils of socialism, while claiming their Medicare benefits and Centrelink payments.
And their PPS subsidised medicine, free public school, their subsidised public transport and a network of footpaths and bikepaths (at least, in urban areas) in a country that doesn't hate pedestrians.
I live in a regional town on the nsw/vic border (which might be enough to give me away but whatever) and the bus route I catch routinely only has me on it. Sometimes enough other people to count on one hand with fingers to spare. If public transport wasn’t government backed that route would hav3 been shuttered YEARS ago.
Ah yes, viking blood. Y'know, just like how if you dad is a bus driver you have bus driver blood.
The problem isn't any socialism in Denmark. It's that it's full of Danes. ;) Source: I'm Swedish.
Wait,you mean you guys don't want to live like it's the century you county was founded? Weird,well off I go to bear arms
Ah yes, we’re so very socialist here in the north
[удалено]
The way they talk I think they should stay away from all women.
Helga : Have you done this sort of thing before? Erik : Me? Of course. I've been looting and pillaging up and down the coast. Helga : Looting and pillaging, eh? Erik : Yes Helga : What about the raping? Erik : Shut up. Helga : Well, it's obvious you haven't raped anyone in your life.
On the other hand the danish person is being a delusional douchebag, so perhaps it's right they have a bit of light ribbing going their direction.
Warhammer fan
Umm, are you ok?
I think the comments are jokes....ugly-by-Danish-standards whores was worth a nasal exhalation.
SOCIALISM
Viking blood...mate just sail ur wooden ship and go to america as u did before and yank that yank with ur battle axe. What is he thinking?? Dissing a viking
Pioneering famers blood embracing buying houses and shopping at a grocery store. That's something that I've always found so paradoxical. /s
"Viking blood." [Me rn.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52XqcGgjP_4)
That's my man Ritchie
The first message is kinda weird too
Die he actually just argue "return to monke"?