prove me wrong
>two sides driven by two totally different ideals with no middle ground
>getting more and more divided every day
>literally a life and death situation for the survival of the country
the left is proving that we're not going to fix any of this with elections. we're sitting on a goddamn tinderbox, and the longer we wait to light the match, the longer the left has to prepare. nothing but total war and unwavering brutality is going to win this
Shit, the OP pic is real. How does a Harvard Professor get away with saying this kind of shit? Oh, wait. It really is way past the time for talking.
You know they're just going to clamp down on any resistance as soon as it crops up. What's even the fucking point.
The U.S. government and all its law enforcement bodies are just as divided as the rest of the nation, and easily lean far more toward the right. this is especially true of the military. getting police, military, and law enforcement to fracture would guarantee a win against the leftists
Cop here, I’ll help you with your revolution but only if you promise to lick these boots boy.
>the longer the left has to prepare
Oh yeah buddy the side that is overwhelmingly staffed by people who think they should share everything is the side that is more effective at planning for the future.
because jews control both academia and media almost entirely, they can get away with anything
This is why there will never be a civil war in the USA again
You cannot shoot this down with a rifle
and besides which none of you NRA pussies have got any balls
Shouldn't be too hard, the Left openly spits on the armed forces and police. Pretty sure as soon as mass riots broke out after widespread power blackouts in major cities they would all just pack up their bags and leave and let the nogs eat their hipster "allies"
you stupid bong. who do you think's gonna be piloting those in a civil war? niggers, illegals, antifa and jews? topkek. A civil war scenario in the US is gonna have the military 75-80% siding with right-leaning factions. it'd be an absolute bloodbath for commies
only deporting or killing all the jews will fix the US
*hacks ur pilots brain*
there'll be war but it won't fix anything
the majority of the states will be won by la raza cosmica, the rest will be white states and a few black states
balkanization will happen
>cannot shoot this down with a rifle
Why would I need to shoot down a plane when I can capture their fuel production?
Within a decade all their stores will be made useless.
if you capture and/or destroy their fuel depots then how they gonna store fuel to use for 10 years? all the food production, most of the oil production, water, etc are all coming from deep red states. and not to mention most of the nukes are all deep in red territory. set up siege conditions in major lefty cities and just let them eat each other, and threaten MAD for any foreign power trying to interfere
any one of over a dozen trident II armed subs could go rogue and just knock the everloving shit out of any single foreign power trying to interfere just as a warning shot to everyone else
what I'll never understand is why these people who decide to "go in" always hit these pointless and counterproductive soft targets like churches and synagogues and shit, instead of like the legislators and judges who are supporting the systematic mass invasion of our country and/or stonewalling all attempts to stop it. It's a clear attack on our very nation and that is some deserved retribution if I can think of any at all that could even get the support of more normies than you might think. I could imagine the message it would send if like 6 or 7 of the worst ones across multiple states/districts got hit on the same day.
When just one little old judge dies, everyone loses their freakin' minds. imagine half a dozen.
>MONUMENT — The head of Colorado prisons was shot to death as he answered the front door of his Monument home, triggering a massive murder investigation and prompting extraordinary safety precautions around the state in case the killer targets other government officials.
>Tom Clements, 58, executive director of the Colorado Department of Corrections, died Tuesday night at his home on the 17400 block of Colonial Park Drive.
>His wife, Lisa, told a 911 dispatcher that someone rang the doorbell and then shot her husband in the chest, according to a dispatcher’s recording that described her as “very distraught.” The call came in at 8:42 p.m.
Yes, a war between kikes and their most loyal golems versus everybody else.
The weakening of the US implies future prosperity for the world
you wont be able to kill or deport any of them in any significant numbers without a civil war. 95% of jews are the most vile leftists you can imagine. just kill all the leftists and you hit all the undesireables
You have absolutely no idea how much the rest of the world is propped up by the United States. A major American internal conflict would mean global economic collapse as well as withdrawal of almost all military support of allies. Major military players like Russia and China would, with their relative strength, bulldoze surrounding nations in massive landgrabs while the U.S. dukes it out with its leftists/blacks/illegals. And the same kinds of internal conflicts would likely ignite all over Europe once they began in the U.S.
And the U.S. that emerged from that kind of conflict would be led by far more brutal and far less forgiving individuals that the mealy-mouthed weasels that came before. If you think the U.S. dominates the world now, then it will absolutely *own* the entire world after a conflict such as this.
Is there really any other possible outcome at this point? I mean we all see where this is headed... continued escalation until one side or the other just snaps. And if another 20 years go by, there won't be enough American Patriots to fight any kind of meaningful resistance.
>the average IQ in guatemala is 79
topkek, you're going nowhere but down without hands up from americans
The dissolution of the jewish identity is the only way forward.
>average IQ is down after the ideological elites were eliminated in the name of "anti-communism"
Shocking!
Besides your """""""""""aid""""""""" is actually dooming us to remain forever undeveloped.
It's actually the military-enterprise complex' salary, for the hard job of keeping everyone as stupid as possible and the region undeveloped.
it's always been that way you absolutely braindead doublenigger. it's why no one wants you in their countries.
>white capitalists took our IQs away
That's some serious wewuz shit right there. And it isn't the foreign aid that gives some semblance of civilization and prosperity to your country; it's trade with the U.S., which is near 3/4ths of your entire GDP. Millions of people in your country would literally starve without America.
a peaceful divorce is more desirable than civil war. if the war happens, millions will die and it will devastate the entire country. It'l take decades to get back on track. Just balkanize this place and be done with it.
And neither do we want you americans putting your grubby hands everywhere, but you can't seem to stop for a moment
And you know why that is? Multinational corporations own 98% of the land of the country, and use it for coffee and palm oil. Even the few food that is planted is aimed nearly exclusively for exporting.
There's a reason why agrarian reform was such a big deal in the history of this country. For once, it gave the population the means to support and better themselves, which is antiethical to US imperialists and local criollo oligarchies.
Don't believe the GDP. All trade with the US that's not a remittance is exclusive property of the 0.05%.
>>two sides driven by two totally different ideals with no middle ground
lmao cuckservatives are spineless cucks who continue to shift left, they always give in as long as they get to preserve the bread and circus
The distribution of Leftists isn't such that they are in easily "Balkanizeable" regions. They tend to occupy major cities, whereas the Patriot types occupy pretty much everywhere else. People aren't just going to pick up stakes and move to some "commie confinement zone" without a fight.
Further, they don't deserve a single ounce of American soil -- not after what they've done over the past 100 years. They have openly declared war on our very way of life, and give every indication that they still wouldn't leave Americans alone even if confined to their own countries. They would storm our gates, jump our walls, and demand "reparations" for how we "destroyed their economies" by leaving them to their own failed ideology.
No, there's no peaceful resolution here. The only viable option is to reduce their numbers to the point where they won't pose a threat to civilization ever again. It does no good to win just one battle -- you should win all the future ones as well, because if you pussy out and don't finish the job, it always comes back to bite you in the ass later.
its fucking asinine to think that any national domestic conflict would be "2-sided" with clueless liberals, zombie leftists, and zogged establishment troopers against patriotic constitutionalists and huwhite nationalist militias
once the United States Aircraft Carrier Shekel comes crashing down, you're gonna see some real whacky shit. i sure as shit wouldn't want to be in the southwest US, especially not southern cali
>How does a Harvard Professor get away with saying this kind of shit?
Because Harvard is all jewed up.
the only grubby fingers here are yours, 80 iq pedro
>more effective at planning for the future.
sure it is. the left can't even add up the cost of all the illegals they keep letting in, the cost of the illegal's retirement and the cost of the illegal's medical care.
but "left vs right" is pretty much the major fracture/division in the US. There'd be some uneasy alliances on the right, with the left being pretty lock-step, but that's more or less how the lines would be drawn.
none of that twitter trash is relevant to real life, Trump as a populist is a good signal your empire is coming to an end (on average empires last 300 years), the division in your country is racial, and the next civil war will be fought on those grounds to the same end as the last, the abolishment of the governments debt.
The quote was taken out of context. Notice the key words: "social construct" in
>until the social construct known as the white race is destroyed
He isn't talking about white genocide, he's talking about the dismantling of the idea that all Europeans share a common heritage, which is indeed absurd. He's unironically right, Europeans are made up of a bunch of different exclusive ethnicities and nations which have fought one another for thousands of years. The notion that they all magically constitute a monolithic "white race" is a retarded concept that doesn't actually help nationalist causes. An Italian doesn't consider himself "white", he considers himself Italian.
Well we are already seeing that very line being drawn now pretty severely. It's Leftists/nonwhites against patriot whites. And as much as I would love to believe that there are significant numbers of nonwhites that would side with the right, we all know good and well that when the chips are down and they gotta make the hardline decision, they're going to go left.
>second civil war will fix the US
That's what (((they))) want.
Too bad the left and right fight for ZOG
I'm gonna have to see your c-clamp skill first.
>he meant genocide only metaphorically
Can it, Shlomo. We all know what Jews would do if some white man said this about them.
this. the notion that america will start a civil war over "left vs right" asinine because its clearly obvious that neither sides gives a shit when their worst nightmare is in charge. but america will still collapse because its aquired so much debt that it would be impossible to break off
They really don't. They know what happens when these kinds of massive internal conflicts go down, because they are never on the winning side of them. Russia would probably like to see the US erupt in a civil war so it can roll tanks on Europe with impunity, but as another user said the outcome would be a stronger and more brutal US that would put up with far less shit from other countries.
this is a lefty jew and he is scared
using that argument, there's no such thing as a black race, a hispanic race or semitics race. they've all been at each other's throats since the dawn of time.
It's not the same situation. Jews make up a very small percentage of the world population and there aren't that many different types of Jews. Ashkenazi, Sephardi, and Mizrahi are allowed to live in Israel along with 20% Arabs and other minorities. Jews can actually claim a broader identity of being "Jewish" outside of their more specific identities because it's tied to religion and they share a common origin and geographical area. The Jews make up a nation. Italians and Brits do not make up a nation together as they're quite different. Claiming a "European identity" is quite globalism in nature - it's anti-Nationalist.
>has acquired so much debt
that's pretty much the entire world. europe and canada are arguably in even worse financial shape when you throw in their unfunded liabilities. the absolute shitstorm that's brewing is going to be brutal
scared of what? also how am i lefty? for seeing that a 50% white america and 40 trillion in debt won't be sustainable? better save those american memorabillia gramps because they're gonna valuable just like soviet memorabillia on ebay is today
Yes, FBI, why do you pick pointless targets??
literally lold at this weak pilpul.
You're missing the point. He's not denying the existence of the white race, he's saying it's a social construct, which it is. The white race exists, but using that broad category as your identity is counter to the idea of a nationalistic identity and as such it's not good for your country specifically.
Blacks are a race, but Hispanics are not. Hispanics are an ethnicity because of the varying degree of admixture which they have.
The kikes are descending onto this thread. They hear the clock ticking.
>They really don't.
The Soros' do. They make their fortune busting up nations and 'balkanizing' them. The Soros' have been the financial force behind all of the color revolutions in Europe and the Middle East.
Because Europeans vary so wildly in their morals and methods of self governance. You know what white culture is and you know what it isn't, that is culture, deal with it kike.
>Y-you're a J-jew
And not a single argument was seen that day.
Why would I need to shoot it down? Kill the pilot before he takes off. Blow holes in the runway. Kill the support crews. Burn his house down while he is in the air. Etc. Etc.
WTF is wrong with you?
> Ignatiev's study of Irish immigrants in the 19th-century United States argues that an Irish triumph overnativismmarks the incorporation of the Irish into the dominant group of American society. Ignatiev asserts that the Irish were not initially accepted as white by the dominant English-American population. He claims that only through their own violence against free blacks and support of slavery did the Irish gain acceptance as white.
Looking at countless threads about who are whites and who are not I think this Noel Ignatiev was kinda right.
>You know what white culture is and you know what it isn't
No, I don't. Using vague notions doesn't define "white culture". What is it? Because Europe is made up of a bunch of very different nations which have wildly different cultures and methods of governance. Or are you going to tell me that Swedish morals and form of governance are the same as Italy's?
Does some user here know where this Prof. Noel Ignatiev has his current residence?
You know as well as I do that he's not countering the concept of globalism by advocating for the eradication of the white race. He literally wants whites neutralized so they don't pose a threat to Jews, which they project onto "all minorities" (with Jews as the leading figures in this crusade). The Jewish fear of whites is so ingrained into their culture that it might as well be genetic at this point, and they very clearly have collectivized against what they call the "white race."
This. Even E. Michael Jones says the same thing. Ignatiev's argument is correct, but white supremacists dismiss it because he's a Jew and they take his quotes out of context.
>advocating for the eradication of the white race
He did no such thing. He's advocating for the eradication of the broad social construct, not whites themselves. Ignatiev's argument is nationalistic in nature.
Yep. The damage control over Ignatiev's statements is hilarious. They know their game is up. They pulled the same weasel shit when blacks went around marching and screaming for dead cops.
>make no mistake about it: we intend to keep bashing the dead white males, and the live ones, and the females too
So what context is exactly needed to justify that part, you fucking retard?
>What is a metaphor?
Are you actually retarded or are you just playing the part?
Does anyone have the address of Mr. Ignatiev?
>all this larping
Its gonna be elysium on earth and top elites living in comfyass space station. Instead of fantasy tripping you'd be better off learning how to say "yes massuh robot" correctly so you dont get your head mutilated into tomato soup by multi billion dollar boston dynamics toys. 22nd century earth is gonna be like mad max meets south park "canceled".
Except you're a lying Jew, and in no way is he supporting nationalism. He's openly supporting multiculturalism and the forced dissolution of the "white privilege hierarchy." And he's being very mealy-mouthed about his support of violence to achieve these goals.
>Consider this parallel: To be against royalty does not mean wanting to kill the king. It means wanting to do away with crowns, thrones, titles, and the privileges attached to them. In our view, whiteness has a lot in common with royalty: they are both social formations that carry unearned advantages.
Monarchies aren't very commonly abolished through peaceful means, but violence is implied even just within the government controls Ignatiev supports to "abolish the white race."
God, I hate Jews. And they're so damned obvious in how they "debate." If they didn't lie, they wouldn't be breathing.
Nice
oh so he was just kidding? he didn't mean it?
Answer in plain language: Does he want to bash whites, yes OR no?
>the irish weren't white
>they couldn't vote, own property, serve in the military, or marry into Anglo-American families
Why are anti-whites so stupid?
>White is a social construct
If I said what does an East Asian look like, you would know what I was talking about with an image in your head. There are variances among them and it is a large area, but the basic culture, history, and phenotype of Europeans is homogeneous. They are united by a common language family (with notable hungarian and finno exceptions), common religion (indo-European paganism and then Christendom), common appearances of light skin and eyes, and a history of interaction.
It is entirely possible to be a White nationalist and an ethnic nationalist at the same time. All English are white, and they are a single member of the larger white race. They don't want their country filled with Poles or Russians because it would no longer be English even if it is still white.
And if Whites cannot be considered a race despite all this, how can Sub-Saharan Africans be considered a race despite the gigantic gaps between them.
>To be against royalty does not mean wanting to kill the king. It means wanting to do away with crowns, thrones, titles, and the privileges attached to them.
This doesn't support your point. He's obviously saying this has nothing to do with violence or genocide but with the concept of rescinding the notion of "whiteness" and embracing a specific ethnicity. This triggers the Amerimutt because for the Amerimutt their identity revolves around being "white".
If you were an ethnic German, living in Germany, would you rather consider yourself "white" or "German"? Because purity spirals exist and many times you'll be grouped in with people you don't like. The concept of a "white race" is not beneficial to nations of specific peoples. It's globalistic in nature and Ignatiev was /ourguy/
A few choice quotes which explain the context:
>The aim was to chronicle and analyze the making, remaking, and unmaking of whiteness. My book on the Irish was the story of how people for whom whiteness had no meaning learned its rules and adapted their behavior to take advantage of them;
>Our standard response is to draw an analogy with anti-royalism: to oppose monarchy does not mean killing the king; it means getting rid of crowns, thrones, royal titles, etc....
>Asked in a 1997 interview with the New York Times if he hates his own white skin, Mr. Ignatiev said, "No, but I want to abolish the privileges."
>"The white race is like a private club based on one huge assumption that all those who look white, are, whatever their complaints or reservations, fundamentally loyal to the race. We want to dissolve that club, to explode it," he said.
He's obviously not advocating for genocide, he's advocating for ethnic identity and nationalism.
>rural shitholes that suck up federal tax dollars and generate no revenue continue to bitch and moan about the regions of the country that generate their welfarebux
K
>prove me wrong
I can't
Not if we kill them all they can't.
>You cannot shoot this down with a rifle
We shoot the pilot and the maintenance crew you dumb nigger-lover.
here is how that is going to play out retard
>pilot gets orders to bomb white nationalist camp
>pilot is a sympathizer
>pilot refuses orders and gets shot for treason
>THEY replace him with an npc who will follow orders.
end of fucking story.
>and embracing a specific ethnicity
Why is European solidarity so scary? Whites have many nations and one race, Igantiev wants to abolish to concept of both. In his world Americans, Irish, Italians, and Swedes can be any color or from anywhere because they don't actually exist.
>If you were an ethnic German, living in Germany, would you rather consider yourself "white" or "German"?
It's not an either/or. They and we don't have to pick between them.
>It's globalistic in nature
Globalism is multicultrualism. America at the height of mythic "whiteness" demanded cultural cohesion and highly restrictive immigration. Globalism promotes browns and black living among whites for lower wages while demanding the white race be abolished.
>And the same kinds of internal conflicts would likely ignite all over Europe once they began in the U.S.
Exactly what Europe needs right now.
Then light the match. We both know you won't. We both know you're 10 ply soft and are too content to come home every day and bitch on Jow Forums. You're the same type of lame faggot that wants everyone else to do the work. You just want your participation trophy. Either start this shit yourself or fuck off.
>That's what (((they))) want.
Read The Turner Diaries nigger.
Civil War doesn't well for the Jews
>If I said what does an East Asian look like, you would know what I was talking about with an image in your head.
That's called a social construct.
>phenotype of Europeans is homogeneous
No it isn't. You don't know what homogeneous means. Swedes do not look like Spaniards.
>They are united by a common language
Wrong again. There are Germanic languages, Latin languages, etc. Swedish is very different from Italian.
>common religion
Pic related.
>a history of interaction
Nice euphemism for 'war'.
>It is entirely possible to be a White nationalist and an ethnic nationalist at the same time.
No it's not. You can claim you are, but the concepts are contradictory and mutually exclusive. Being a "white nationalist" doesn't help your ethnic cause. Ignatiev explains why.
>All English are white
According to your definition of "white". What about Portuguese? Because some people will disagree with you. Who is the ultimate arbiter for what is considered "white"?
>And if Whites cannot be considered a race despite all this
Yes, the "white race" exists if you look at how haplomemes cluster etc., but Ignatiev's idea is that using that broad category for your identity does more harm than good, both for you, your people, and other peoples.
Um, he literally says he wants to do away with the whiteness the same way you do away with a king. Holy shit, you can't get any plainer.
>Its gonna be elysium on earth and top elites living in comfyass space station
Living is space is never going to feasible so long as microgravity is still a thing.
>muh four-legged robot
An overpriced toy that will malfunction at the first faulty battery or failed software update. Not to mention you can just kick the damn thing over.
"Whiteness" is multiculturalism. That's why you had the English, the Dutch, the Germans, the Italians, and the Poles all subsumed under the concept of "the white race" in America.
Read it again retard. He says it doesn't mean killing the king but doing away with the notion of "kingness".
I do predict civil wars in the west in the next few decades
>That's called a social construct.
So East Asians do exist then? You admit that a certain "East Asianness" exists and is known among themselves and the world? By your own logic they must work to destory these ties that bind until the social construct known as "East Asians" no longer exists.
>No it isn't. You don't know what homogeneous means. Swedes do not look like Spaniards.
If you put 5 men from the corners of Europe in a room and 5 men from the corners of Africa, Asia, and Central America in the same room you could accurately put each into a group. Swedes don't look like Spaniards, but you can clearly tell both are from Europe.
>Wrong again. There are Germanic languages, Latin languages, etc. Swedish is very different from Italian.
Indo-European, remember not to speed read. One language family from a common Aryan invasion thousands of years ago.
>common religion pick related
Still Christianity. That's even more cohesive than the paganism they shared that also was a common indo-European religion in Europe.
>Nice euphemism for 'war'.
And trade, intermarriage, learning, etc..
I think you were being deliberately obtuse on this one.
>No it's not. You can claim you are, but the concepts are contradictory and mutually exclusive. Being a "white nationalist" doesn't help your ethnic cause. Ignatiev explains why.
Yes it does. All English are white but not all Whites are English. You are automatically a White nationalist if you are an English nationalist because there is no such thing a black or asian ethnic Englishmen.
>According to your definition of "white". What about Portuguese? Because some people will disagree with you. Who is the ultimate arbiter for what is considered "white"?
European. Look at history and the debate has always been not about who was White in Europe, but who were the best whites in Europe.
Part 1.
lol the right wont win a civil war. There has never been successful right wing revolution if sp they are few and FAAAARRRR between, want to know why?
the right is dumb as a box of rocks
they cant code
they cant make art
they cant make entertainment
they cant even get rich when weve had 100 years of upward stock movement and realstate booms.
why am i pointing out things which the right cant do that have nothing to do with warfare, because of all of those things require out of the box thinking the key skill which is required for warfare and tactical planning.
tell me again how the right plans to defeat a bunch of ph'ds who study cryptography,human behavioural psychological and have access to satellite communications,super computers and a whole bunch of darpa shit from a well funded and ever browning military.
yeah yeah...i await some delusionally cope answer.
Like the other user said, you don't get rid of "royal privilege" peacefully. It's obvious what he's saying.
>Yes, the "white race" exists if you look at how haplomemes cluster etc., but Ignatiev's idea is that using that broad category for your identity does more harm than good, both for you, your people, and other peoples.
How does it harm me to have solidarty with men of brother nations who share my blood, many of my common values, religion, and a history of friendship and rivalry? Not to mention those nations most similar to mine are more prone to cooperation and assimilation than hostile populations, such as the jews, who want to abolish the bonds we share together as a common race?
>"Whiteness" is multiculturalism. That's why you had the English, the Dutch, the Germans, the Italians, and the Poles all subsumed under the concept of "the white race" in America.
The White race in America was under the command of the British, themselves a combination of Scots, Anglos, Ulstermen, and Welsh. Should "Britishness" be dismantled because Scots and Englishmen are scary when they are united?
Furthermore, Igantiev wants the White race dismantled so that white ethnicities will be dismantled as well. Do you think he believes that ethnic poles exist or that anyone from the bantu to the Viet can be polish? He's anti-white not out of nationalism, but hatred for all white ethnicities together.
>So East Asians do exist then?
Yes, but if you're an East Asian it doesn't do you any good to have your whole identity revolve around being "East Asian". If you're Japanese you consider yourself Japanese. What Ignatiev is warning against is abandoning this concept of being "Japanese" in favor of being "East Asian".
>Swedes don't look like Spaniards, but you can clearly tell both are from Europe.
Yes, there are more similarities between them than an African and a Swede. I don't see your point. I'm not saying the notion of a "European race" doesn't exist; genetics confirms this - the question is where you draw the line. But the whole point is that it's not a good thing to base your entire ethnic identity on it. And no one in Europe does this, it's an American thing because all the ethnicities in the U.S. lost their specific ethnic identity when they migrated. This concept of "whiteness" is why America is so pozzed right now and why there's no unity.
>Still Christianity.
Very different forms of Christianity both in doctrine, theology, and in practice. Catholics consider Prots to be heretics who are going to Hell. They're basically different religions.
>All English are white
According to who? Who is defining this term "white" and deciding who is white and who is not? Because not even white nationalists can answer this one - the best they can come up with are vague notions or dodging the question.
>you don't get rid of "royal privilege" peacefully
Yes you can.
Many European nations have gotten rid of it in modern times without a war. One specific example is Spain. Franco wanted a restoration of the monarchy in the country so he gave full control to Juan Carlos before he died. Juan Carlos became King but then allowed liberal reform to take place and instituted a democracy, effectively ending the power of the monarchy. There was no violent revolution, assassination, or war. It was the monarch himself rejecting the notion of royal privilege and power. That's Ignatiev's point with regards to "whiteness".
This
>Yes, but if you're an East Asian it doesn't do you any good to have your whole identity revolve around being "East Asian". If you're Japanese you consider yourself Japanese. What Ignatiev is warning against is abandoning this concept of being "Japanese" in favor of being "East Asian".
I am an American, pre 1965. I am white by default because that's what being an American means. My ancestors were Americans too, they were also white. African-Americans or Asian-Americans aren't white and are their only citizenship is given by paper not birthright and inheritance of this nation. Nobody is "white alone" America was, is, and will remain a white people even if the country itself is no longer made of its original inhabitants.
>Yes, there are more similarities between them than an African and a Swede. I don't see your point. I'm not saying the notion of a "European race" doesn't exist; genetics confirms this - the question is where you draw the line. But the whole point is that it's not a good thing to base your entire ethnic identity on it. And no one in Europe does this, it's an American thing because all the ethnicities in the U.S. lost their specific ethnic identity when they migrated. This concept of "whiteness" is why America is so pozzed right now and why there's no unity.
"White" and "European Race" are synonyms. The ethnic identity is part of the racial identity. Every Zulu is a Bantu, and every Bantu is Black. In the same way every Swede is Nordic, and all Nordics are White. But Spaniards are Latin, different, but still White.
>it's an American thing because all the ethnicities in the U.S. lost their specific ethnic identity when they migrated
Because they assimialted into Anglo-American society. Like how the Firisians, Anglos, Jutes, and Saxons became the English. And even then America's base stock is still heavily northern Atlantic.
Part 1.
This.
Also, i'd argue a Tucker Carlson / Josh Hawley ticket in 2024 would win as long as they hide their NatSoc power level during the campaign. That would potentially head off civil war.
You jewish fucks truly are despicable. You tribalize then tell everyone not to, specifically white people,and prevent them to do anything together and eradicate them. Then sit there and play victim when one of us goes insane. Fuck. Off.
>He's anti-white not out of nationalism, but hatred for all white ethnicities together.
[Citation needed].
He was pretty clear in what he was supporting and he wasn't speaking of "hate"; he was supporting the idea of either ethnic nationalism (in countries which are ethnically homogeneous) or civic nationalism in places like America where are a variety of different peoples already. He rejects the notion of basing your entire identity around this concept of "white" and it has nothing to do with hate.
It's ironic how white supremacists accuse the liberals of using the "hate speech" claim to censor them but you're essentially doing the same thing here dismissing the argument by saying it's "hateful" and attacking his character and motivations. Show evidence of it or address the actual points.