Is It Evil For Whites to Want to Conserve Themselves?

:lol: White fear is hilarious. The whole world is out to get ya! PATHETIC!

BTW...absolutely nothing wrong with the desire to preserve your race...but what are you preserving. I already asked...define white culture...you couldn't answer.


Make no mistake they are shitting their pants


Professor Jose Angel Gutierrez, University of Texas; "We have an aging white America. They are not making babies. They are dying. The explosion is in our population ... I love it. They are shitting in their pants with fear. I love it."
If that brown klansman ever met me he would be shitting out his heart.
White nationalists are the most intelligent and strongest of our people, the only thing you fear more than us is white babies.


You're a coward and a fool. Shut the hell up, boy.
Do you want to get your ass kicked too little twink?


Gosh, what a scary clown... :rolleyes:
 
Here is what you will have a great deal of trouble understanding.

Racism, when practiced by European whites in America, has been exponentially more damaging to the races being discriminated against, than racism practiced by all other racial groups combined.

Blacks calling whites "honkeys" never prevented whites from buying real estate anywhere.

Asians not serving white people the same way at Dim Sum restaurants has never led to segregation of whites into specific non-asian areas.

Racism practiced by whites, gets noticed more than racism from non whites, because of it's historical impact.

Get over it.

You probably think you're oppressed, or doing blacks a favor, by not using the "N" word in public anymore

The changing demographics literally reverses your argument.
 
Of all the things worth worrying about in this world, that some craven little dimwits spend their time quivering in fear over how many people may or may not have a certain skin color at some imagined point in the the future is beyond stupid.
 
Granny says, "Dat's right...

... us white folks gotta stick together...

... or purt soon there won't be no white folks...

... an' den ever'thin' gonna go to hell inna handbasket."
 
racist1.jpg
 
I thinks whites are afraid they will experience the same horrors they put minorities through in the future.
 
Of all the things worth worrying about in this world, that some craven little dimwits spend their time quivering in fear over how many people may or may not have a certain skin color at some imagined point in the the future is beyond stupid.
It is called being concerned for our well being when we are old, and for our descendants.

Actually believing that non-whites will magically be tolerant and kind to us when they will literally have the power to exterminate us off the face of the Earth is not only extremely naive and stupid, it also requires you to believe non-whites are absolutely morally and ethically superior, and that is definitely not a egalitarian, progressive idea.
 
I thinks whites are afraid they will experience the same horrors they put minorities through in the future.
I doubt Asians with a more pure Eastern mindset would.
Are you familiar with WWII? Japanese beheadings and torture.

What is the name Japs have for white people?

Be afraid...the darkies are gonna get you!
 
I thinks whites are afraid they will experience the same horrors they put minorities through in the future.
I doubt Asians with a more pure Eastern mindset would.
Are you familiar with WWII? Japanese beheadings and torture.

What is the name Japs have for white people?

Be afraid...the darkies are gonna get you!
The Japanese are much different now, and they will need immigration, if only temporarily.

It is much better for Asia to import white people to fill the gaps as we are much better educated, we are much more willing to assimilate and our crime rates are comparable to the Asian standard.

China is already regretting importing all those Africans, while white people in China and greater East Asia have never really been a problem.
 
White Survival Beyond Left and Right American Renaissance

Nobody questions the right of Navajos to the same.

"However, there are things you are not allowed to want to conserve. Hardly anyone will oppose you if you say that the primitive tribes of New Guinea have the right to maintain their customs and their way of life, undisturbed by outsiders. But you better not say the same thing about the French or the Swedes."
Conserve yourself all you want.
 
Of all the things worth worrying about in this world, that some craven little dimwits spend their time quivering in fear over how many people may or may not have a certain skin color at some imagined point in the the future is beyond stupid.
It is called being concerned for our well being when we are old, and for our descendants.
.



It's called being a sniveling, ridiculous coward.
 
As historians of the Soviet multiethnic state have argued, the Soviet state itself was a “maker of nations,” institutionalizing ethnicity by creating territorial republics based on ethnic criteria and promoting “national languages” and "national cultures" within them. The state also practiced a kind of affirmative action, actively recruiting members of underrepresented nationalities into higher education, jobs, and Communist Party membership.[2] Every Soviet citizen had a single nationality, fixed at the age of 16 and registered in his or her identity document. Being “mixed,” in this context, was not understood as interracial (as in the United States) or interfaith (as in pre-revolutionary tsarist Russia); it was “interethnic” or sometimes “inter-national.”

ussr_ethnic_1974.jpg

Contrasting sharply with the anti-miscegenation attitudes prevalent in the United States, the Soviet state beginning in the early 1930s supported ethnic mixing both in theory and practice. This was originally a response to the eugenicist ideas then prevalent in Nazi Germany and elsewhere. Soviet theorists attacked their ideological opponents by arguing that differences between groups were due to history and culture, not biology. All ethnic groups were equally capable of flourishing, given the right (i.e. socialist) conditions. Moreover, Soviet anthropologists challenged the notion that ethnic or “racial” mixing led to degeneracy and pathology—an idea that had wide currency in the 1930s not just in Germany, but among West European and American scholars. Soviet anthropologists conducted studies designed to show that mixed individuals were just as healthy and productive as people of supposedly “pure” racial background. Ethnic mixing, in the official view, was a positive manifestation of social progress.[3]

rf-dearest-01.jpg


In the world’s first socialist society, intermarriage was seen as contributing to the eventual merging of the Soviet nations into a single “Soviet people.” Intermarriage was also closely associated with modernity, and in particular with the arrival of modernity in “backward” areas such as Central Asia. Soviet analysts argued that mixed couples were more likely to abandon traditional ways and adopt a modern, typically Soviet lifestyle, thereby setting an example for other Central Asians to follow. This “modernity” was often understood in terms of Russian-ness or European-ness, since mixed families were more likely to speak Russian at home and lead an urban, European lifestyle. (Although there was no official policy of russification in the USSR, Russian was the dominant culture and non-Russians were encouraged to become competent in Russian as a second language.) Official Soviet policy had certain similarities with the Latin American ideology of mestizaje, which also celebrated multiethnic and multiracial hybridity.[4] The Soviet approach to intermarriage in Central Asia, with its overtones of Russification, also resembles the attempts of Australia and New Zealand to “Europeanize” their indigenous populations through ethnic mixing (though Russification in the Soviet case was always envisioned as cultural and not biological).[5]
 

Forum List

Back
Top