The end of white America is now clearly in sight

[bitter clinging swiftie]

"racism is just another ugly form of collectivism"---ayn rand

I am a collectivist.

I think individualism is pretty sub-Human, it seems to be about "Me, and mine" it doesn't grasp that as individuals we belong to a greater culture.
The Individualist simply thinks of themselves, not about greater society.

Furthermore Individualism is pretty weak, an extreme Individualist would go so far to say "Treat an invading army as individuals"

LOL, thats pretty weak sauce. This country was founded on the belief of individualism, the creativity, the work ethic, the dreams and willingness to chase them of the INDIVIDUAL. Our founders fell short of those goals, but they still exist, and as long as the belief in one man or wamn's ability to overcome, to achieve, and the willingness to defend that ideal exist, then America will be a great nation always, no matter what the hue of its inhabitants.

This country was founded on establishing individualism where none existed before.

Destroying collectivism and tribalism is not what the founders had in mind.

they championed the rights of the individual. period. every person has the right to live their life as they see fit, within the confines of not violating anyone else's rights.

None of the founders would agree with you.

There is a huge difference between rebeling against being a servant to the king and trying to destroy racial differences because multiculturalism/multi-racialism is a total failure.

all of lthe founders would agree with me, thats why they said we all have INALIABLE RIGHTS. a man can do what the hell he wants to until such time where his actions violate the rights of another.
what right of yours am I violating by sleeping with a non-white woman?

 

[ptbw forever]

Topics like this ignore nature for the sake of pimping divisions of color. As the races continue to mingle there will only be one "color" in the end.

Most in the West do not race mix.

How do you justify eradicating unique, and diverse peoples in the process?

Did you type that with a straight face? Have you been out in America lately?

My two grandsons are white, black, Hispanic and Native American mixes. My granddaughter is white and Hispanic mixed, although she looks like a Nordic princess.

I am not alone.

And all of my 3 siblings are in a relationship with a white person, with my estranged brother literally having white kids from 2 different white women, one of which he married.

My step-brother also has 2 white kids with his Iowa cornbread ginger wife.

The only one in my family who married outside of his race was my now dead uncle, and he only had one white-looking kid who will probably marry a white guy to produce a nearly white kid.

Race mixing for white people is quickly becoming rare again, while Asians and Hispanics are the ones increasing IR dating and marriage.

Perhaps in your neck of the woods, but as someone who travels extensively and sees the kids in my classroom, you are way out to lunch!

Very very few of the white kids you see "dating" non-white kids will ever marry a non-white person.

As the demographics change and the anti-white rhetoric penetrates the very last elements of society, the number of the white people race mixing will drop dramatically.

You are living in the past, and so are the kids who are still influenced by boomers.

 

[bitter clinging swiftie]

Topics like this ignore nature for the sake of pimping divisions of color. As the races continue to mingle there will only be one "color" in the end.

Most in the West do not race mix.

How do you justify eradicating unique, and diverse peoples in the process?

Did you type that with a straight face? Have you been out in America lately?

My two grandsons are white, black, Hispanic and Native American mixes. My granddaughter is white and Hispanic mixed, although she looks like a Nordic princess.

I am not alone.

And all of my 3 siblings are in a relationship with a white person, with my estranged brother literally having white kids from 2 different white women, one of which he married.

My step-brother also has 2 white kids with his Iowa cornbread ginger wife.

The only one in my family who married outside of his race was my now dead uncle, and he only had one white-looking kid who will probably marry a white guy to produce a nearly white kid.

Race mixing for white people is quickly becoming rare again, while Asians and Hispanics are the ones increasing IR dating and marriage.

Perhaps in your neck of the woods, but as someone who travels extensively and sees the kids in my classroom, you are way out to lunch!

Very very few of the white kids you see "dating" non-white kids will ever marry a non-white person.

As the demographics change and the anti-white rhetoric penetrates the very last elements of society, the number of the white people race mixing will drop dramatically.

You are living in the past, and so are the kids who are still influenced by boomers.

you just gave the best case against what youu are preaching. A lot of people are open to the idea of IR dating, but when its said and done, most marry their own.l I didnt, but Im a small minority.

 

[PredFan]

 

[koshergrl]

An informative story at the BBC....

How young Americans are set to change the US forever - BBC News
Non-whites are the major source of population increase for the US for some time now.
The Hispanic population will become the predominant ethnic group within 50 years at the current rate.
Even the Asian rate of population growth exceeds the growth rate of the white ethnic group.

The white population median age is now 43 and growing older. It's simply a matter of time.

And with the decline in white people from rural America and traditionalists regions who historically have been Patriots, so will go the inclination to preserve the framework of the USA as founded.

It won't matter to most of us since we'll be gone......but in 200 years I would venture a guess that the USA will be dramatically different than it has been for the last 200 or so. Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing probably depends on your point of view.

Also....I think the UK is closer to becoming something other than white.
At the rate they're going they'll be under Sharia Law in less than a decade.

Brits will meekly stand by and let their country become a Muslim hell hole.

Maybe they will put up some resistance when the Muslim will come - and it is inevitable - after their precious royals.

Di's boyfriend was muslim, and she may have been pregnant.

 

[bitter clinging swiftie]

for all those who call mixed marriages "white genocide"
what do you think should be done about it?
pass a law?

 

[ptbw forever]

I am a collectivist.

I think individualism is pretty sub-Human, it seems to be about "Me, and mine" it doesn't grasp that as individuals we belong to a greater culture.
The Individualist simply thinks of themselves, not about greater society.

Furthermore Individualism is pretty weak, an extreme Individualist would go so far to say "Treat an invading army as individuals"

LOL, thats pretty weak sauce. This country was founded on the belief of individualism, the creativity, the work ethic, the dreams and willingness to chase them of the INDIVIDUAL. Our founders fell short of those goals, but they still exist, and as long as the belief in one man or wamn's ability to overcome, to achieve, and the willingness to defend that ideal exist, then America will be a great nation always, no matter what the hue of its inhabitants.

This country was founded on establishing individualism where none existed before.

Destroying collectivism and tribalism is not what the founders had in mind.

they championed the rights of the individual. period. every person has the right to live their life as they see fit, within the confines of not violating anyone else's rights.

None of the founders would agree with you.

There is a huge difference between rebeling against being a servant to the king and trying to destroy racial differences because multiculturalism/multi-racialism is a total failure.

all of lthe founders would agree with me, thats why they said we all have INALIABLE RIGHTS. a man can do what the hell he wants to until such time where his actions violate the rights of another.
what right of yours am I violating by sleeping with a non-white woman?

All of the founders were white nationalists, or even ethno-nationalists who couldn't even marry a Western European who wasn't of English heritage.

Even staunch Lincoln Republicans were horrified of integration and race mixing, which is why the Democrats literally used race mixing as a political tool to successfully court Republicans away from Lincoln and the more radical elements of the party(integrationists).

This is not about your rights, it is about the good of society which you take for granted at the racial level.

 

[bitter clinging swiftie]

LOL, thats pretty weak sauce. This country was founded on the belief of individualism, the creativity, the work ethic, the dreams and willingness to chase them of the INDIVIDUAL. Our founders fell short of those goals, but they still exist, and as long as the belief in one man or wamn's ability to overcome, to achieve, and the willingness to defend that ideal exist, then America will be a great nation always, no matter what the hue of its inhabitants.

This country was founded on establishing individualism where none existed before.

Destroying collectivism and tribalism is not what the founders had in mind.

they championed the rights of the individual. period. every person has the right to live their life as they see fit, within the confines of not violating anyone else's rights.

None of the founders would agree with you.

There is a huge difference between rebeling against being a servant to the king and trying to destroy racial differences because multiculturalism/multi-racialism is a total failure.

all of lthe founders would agree with me, thats why they said we all have INALIABLE RIGHTS. a man can do what the hell he wants to until such time where his actions violate the rights of another.
what right of yours am I violating by sleeping with a non-white woman?

All of the founders were white nationalists, or even ethno-nationalists who couldn't even marry a Western European who wasn't of English heritage.

Even staunch Lincoln Republicans were horrified of integration and race mixing, which is why the Democrats literally used race mixing as a political tool to successfully court Republicans away from Lincoln and the more radical elements of the party(integrationists).

This is not about your rights, it is about the good of society which you take for granted at the racial level.

so do you think that it is OK to use force of law to prevent consenting adults from sleeping with each other?
yes or no

 

[Aletheia4u]

An informative story at the BBC....

How young Americans are set to change the US forever - BBC News
Non-whites are the major source of population increase for the US for some time now.
The Hispanic population will become the predominant ethnic group within 50 years at the current rate.
Even the Asian rate of population growth exceeds the growth rate of the white ethnic group.

The white population median age is now 43 and growing older. It's simply a matter of time.

And with the decline in white people from rural America and traditionalists regions who historically have been Patriots, so will go the inclination to preserve the framework of the USA as founded.

It won't matter to most of us since we'll be gone......but in 200 years I would venture a guess that the USA will be dramatically different than it has been for the last 200 or so. Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing probably depends on your point of view.

I think that we are all meant to mingle with different race. That we shouldn't be trying to keep a solid pure race. That doesn't make any sense that we still has people that still get burn from the sun rays.after being on this planet for centuries. Our bodies supposedly adapt to the environment. And then there are races that has been here over centuries that doesn't sun burn at all. But the original Egyptians were blacks, but the wealthy Egyptians has always worn wigs or added hair to their hair so that it can look long. But I believes that the poor Egyptians had worn dreadlocks But they were trying to make their hairs on their heads to look like the other tribes. But when you mixes these groups together, that it will solve their problems. Even there are Asians that are going under the knife to have their eyes big and round. But I thinks that it is meant for us all to be mixed, instead of going under the knife.

My grandfather told me that this powerful man, Edgar, was his second cousin, and was passing for white. If we talked about this, he was so powerful he could have us all killed. I grew up terrified about all this.” Was J. Edgar Hoover black?


According to Wikipedia, J. Edgar Hoover was a black man passing as a white man, and murdered his black relatives to intimidate the others into keeping quiet. OR Why you don't use Wikipedia for anything other than a summary of its sources. • r/badhistory

NAACP Leader Rachel Dolezal Allegedly Faked Being A Black Woman For Years | HuffPost

Julie Chen Reveals 'Asian Eyes' Surgery on 'The Talk' (Video)

Is Jessica Alba part black

.
French Creoles | Creole Experience

Simply and utterly not true. Somebody wasn't paying attention in class.

it is obvious that they were Black people. According to their theory. That they believe that Kushites has taken over Egypt that what made it become ruled by Black people to explain the reason why the Majority of the Egyptian's artwork resembles the Africans. . But then later on the Assyrians came and taken over, which brought it back being ruled by Middle easterners. But in the Bible that it says that Moses had married a Black woman from a neighboring tribe. And so why the Egyptians did not enslaved them? And it says that Moses' sister did not like her because she was Black. And the only reason that it can be that his sister disliked his wife, it is that she might be a close relative of the Egyptians.


.
The 25th dynasty was a line of rulers originating in the Nubian Kingdom of Kush – in present-day northern Sudan and southern Egypt – and most saw Napata as their spiritual homeland. They reigned in part or all of Ancient Egypt from 760–656 BC.[1] The dynasty began with Kashta's invasion of Upper Egypt and culminated in several years of both successful and unsuccessful war with the Mesopotamian based Assyrian Empire. The 25th Dynasty's reunification of Lower Egypt, Upper Egypt, and also Kush (Nubia) created the largest Egyptian empire since the New Kingdom. They assimilated into society by reaffirming Ancient Egyptian religious traditions, temples, and artistic forms, while introducing some unique aspects of Kushite culture.[2] It was during the 25th dynasty that the Nile valley saw the first widespread construction of pyramids (many in modern Sudan) since the Middle Kingdom.[3][4][5]

After the Assyrian kings Sargon II and Sennacherib defeated attempts by the Nubian kings to gain a foothold in the Near East, their successors Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal invaded Egypt and defeated and drove out the Nubians. War with Assyria resulted in the end of Kushite power in Northern Egypt and the conquest of Egypt by Assyria. They were succeeded by the Twenty-sixth dynasty of Egypt, initially a puppet dynasty installed by and vassals of the Assyrians, the last native dynasty to rule Egypt before the Persian Invasion. Twenty-fifth Dynasty of Egypt - Wikipedia

In an ongoing effort to demonstrate the viability of the
Philosophic Cognancy Method
(PCM) for Africancultural comparative studies, I will be conducting an ongoing series of short blogs that will highlight ways that wecan demonstrate either parallels, interactions with or migrations from the ancient Nile Valley civilizations with thatof the rest of Black Africa. In this brief discourse we are going to compare some royal insignia from the Akan of Ghana with that of the royal insignia from ancient Egypt Akan and Egyptian Symbol Comparisons | Ancient Egypt | Africa


The living Descendants of the Ancient Egyptians/Legacy
The living Descendants of the Ancient Egyptians/Legacy - Page 3 - The Phora

 

[ptbw forever]

for all those who call mixed marriages "white genocide"
what do you think should be done about it?
pass a law?

Nobody calls mixed marriages "white genocide", they call it a symptom of the disease.

If you actually watch some videos about white genocide, or even just read an article on counter currents about the subject or something; you would see that race mixing is barely even mentioned.

The way to stop white genocide is for white people to retake Europe from traitors and non-white racists and reintroduce the beauty of the various indigenous cultures there to make young white people feel like they once again belong to a "cool" group that is worth preserving.

Once the boomers die, all the idiots who truly believe in "white privilege" and actually possess "white guilt" will also be dead.

 

[bitter clinging swiftie]

for all those who call mixed marriages "white genocide"
what do you think should be done about it?
pass a law?

Nobody calls mixed marriages "white genocide", they call it a symptom of the disease.

If you actually watch some videos about white genocide, or even just read an article on counter currents about the subject or something; you would see that race mixing is barely even mentioned.

The way to stop white genocide is for white people to retake Europe from traitors and non-white racists and reintroduce the beauty of the various indigenous cultures there to make young white people feel like they once again belong to a "cool" group that is worth preserving.

Once the boomers die, all the idiots who truly believe in "white privilege" and actually possess "white guilt" will also be dead.

you didnt answer my question.....do you believe that people should have the right to sleep with other consenting adults, regardless of race, if they so choose?

 

[ptbw forever]

This country was founded on establishing individualism where none existed before.

Destroying collectivism and tribalism is not what the founders had in mind.

they championed the rights of the individual. period. every person has the right to live their life as they see fit, within the confines of not violating anyone else's rights.

None of the founders would agree with you.

There is a huge difference between rebeling against being a servant to the king and trying to destroy racial differences because multiculturalism/multi-racialism is a total failure.

all of lthe founders would agree with me, thats why they said we all have INALIABLE RIGHTS. a man can do what the hell he wants to until such time where his actions violate the rights of another.
what right of yours am I violating by sleeping with a non-white woman?

All of the founders were white nationalists, or even ethno-nationalists who couldn't even marry a Western European who wasn't of English heritage.

Even staunch Lincoln Republicans were horrified of integration and race mixing, which is why the Democrats literally used race mixing as a political tool to successfully court Republicans away from Lincoln and the more radical elements of the party(integrationists).

This is not about your rights, it is about the good of society which you take for granted at the racial level.

so do you think that it is OK to use force of law to prevent consenting adults from sleeping with each other?
yes or no

I think it is ok to use force of law to keep people from owning property based on race in ethnostates, which makes your question irrelevant.

It is not about stupid boomers and their short-sighted feelings anymore. This is about preventing all-out race wars and genocide in the frightfully near future.

 

[bitter clinging swiftie]

they championed the rights of the individual. period. every person has the right to live their life as they see fit, within the confines of not violating anyone else's rights.

None of the founders would agree with you.

There is a huge difference between rebeling against being a servant to the king and trying to destroy racial differences because multiculturalism/multi-racialism is a total failure.

all of lthe founders would agree with me, thats why they said we all have INALIABLE RIGHTS. a man can do what the hell he wants to until such time where his actions violate the rights of another.
what right of yours am I violating by sleeping with a non-white woman?

All of the founders were white nationalists, or even ethno-nationalists who couldn't even marry a Western European who wasn't of English heritage.

Even staunch Lincoln Republicans were horrified of integration and race mixing, which is why the Democrats literally used race mixing as a political tool to successfully court Republicans away from Lincoln and the more radical elements of the party(integrationists).

This is not about your rights, it is about the good of society which you take for granted at the racial level.

so do you think that it is OK to use force of law to prevent consenting adults from sleeping with each other?
yes or no

I think it is ok to use force of law to keep people from owning property based on race in ethnostates, which makes your question irrelevant.

It is not about stupid boomers and their short-sighted feelings anymore. This is about preventing all-out race wars and genocide in the frightfully near future.

that still isnt a yes or no question
do you or do you not believe that its ok to use force to prevent and/or punish consenting adults from sleeping with each other?

 

[ptbw forever]

None of the founders would agree with you.

There is a huge difference between rebeling against being a servant to the king and trying to destroy racial differences because multiculturalism/multi-racialism is a total failure.

all of lthe founders would agree with me, thats why they said we all have INALIABLE RIGHTS. a man can do what the hell he wants to until such time where his actions violate the rights of another.
what right of yours am I violating by sleeping with a non-white woman?

All of the founders were white nationalists, or even ethno-nationalists who couldn't even marry a Western European who wasn't of English heritage.

Even staunch Lincoln Republicans were horrified of integration and race mixing, which is why the Democrats literally used race mixing as a political tool to successfully court Republicans away from Lincoln and the more radical elements of the party(integrationists).

This is not about your rights, it is about the good of society which you take for granted at the racial level.

so do you think that it is OK to use force of law to prevent consenting adults from sleeping with each other?
yes or no

I think it is ok to use force of law to keep people from owning property based on race in ethnostates, which makes your question irrelevant.

It is not about stupid boomers and their short-sighted feelings anymore. This is about preventing all-out race wars and genocide in the frightfully near future.

that still isnt a yes or no question
do you or do you not believe that its ok to use force to prevent and/or punish consenting adults from sleeping with each other?

Your question is only relevant to someone who lives in the past.

The world you know today is already dying. No one even needs to ban race mixing to reduce it to oblivion.

 

[bitter clinging swiftie]

all of lthe founders would agree with me, thats why they said we all have INALIABLE RIGHTS. a man can do what the hell he wants to until such time where his actions violate the rights of another.
what right of yours am I violating by sleeping with a non-white woman?

All of the founders were white nationalists, or even ethno-nationalists who couldn't even marry a Western European who wasn't of English heritage.

Even staunch Lincoln Republicans were horrified of integration and race mixing, which is why the Democrats literally used race mixing as a political tool to successfully court Republicans away from Lincoln and the more radical elements of the party(integrationists).

This is not about your rights, it is about the good of society which you take for granted at the racial level.

so do you think that it is OK to use force of law to prevent consenting adults from sleeping with each other?
yes or no

I think it is ok to use force of law to keep people from owning property based on race in ethnostates, which makes your question irrelevant.

It is not about stupid boomers and their short-sighted feelings anymore. This is about preventing all-out race wars and genocide in the frightfully near future.

that still isnt a yes or no question
do you or do you not believe that its ok to use force to prevent and/or punish consenting adults from sleeping with each other?

Your question is only relevant to someone who lives in the past.

The world you know today is already dying. No one even needs to ban race mixing to reduce it to oblivion.

is that a yes or a no

 

[Aletheia4u]

You don't get a more diverse culture than the United States

Worked pretty damned well

I thought that minorities and women were prevented from contributing. According to you.

If that's true, than our current policy of encouraging their contribution is a radical break and undermines your assumption of success based on past performance.

Well it depends on what you call contributing

If you consider music, language, food, the arts, movies, labor and raising strong families contributing, then yes all cultures have contributed to our society

However, when you ask......Why aren't more women and more minorities represented as CEO's, Governors, Senators and Congresmen ? You get to the crux of the problem. White males continue to dominate those positions of power

So, historically and even today, minorities were/are supposedly prevented from contributing on the macro level.

Thus, your claim that it will work in the future because it worked in the past, is debunked by your own words.


Are you prepared to discuss the issue seriously and honestly now?

Once again......you are making no sense at either the micro or macro level

You talk about how excluded minorities and women were from positions of power and then claim that since our diversity worked in the past it will work in the future,


but of past success was built by white guys who excluded minorities and women from contributing on their level. As you said.


You are the one that is contradicting yourself.


All to avoid discussing the ramifications of this change seriously and honestly.

It wasn't the Whites that had kept the minorities or the women down. It were the people of power that has kept everyone divided. The F.B.I. and other intelligence agencies were playing on people's intelligence. The F.B.I. had stopped the K.K.K. by playing mind games on the members. But they has also stopped all the other organizations from uniting. If everyone are one, then that means that they aren't in power anymore. And so they has to divide them up into groups. And to make sure each group is no bigger for them to handle, and to make sure that the other groups doesn't involve themselves in other group's matters, to help the other groups. Like in this video, that they has mentioned about their dirty little tricks.

Fast forwarded to 1:11 in the video.

. .

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

they championed the rights of the individual. period. every person has the right to live their life as they see fit, within the confines of not violating anyone else's rights.

None of the founders would agree with you.

There is a huge difference between rebeling against being a servant to the king and trying to destroy racial differences because multiculturalism/multi-racialism is a total failure.

all of lthe founders would agree with me, thats why they said we all have INALIABLE RIGHTS. a man can do what the hell he wants to until such time where his actions violate the rights of another.
what right of yours am I violating by sleeping with a non-white woman?

All of the founders were white nationalists, or even ethno-nationalists who couldn't even marry a Western European who wasn't of English heritage.

Even staunch Lincoln Republicans were horrified of integration and race mixing, which is why the Democrats literally used race mixing as a political tool to successfully court Republicans away from Lincoln and the more radical elements of the party(integrationists).

This is not about your rights, it is about the good of society which you take for granted at the racial level.

so do you think that it is OK to use force of law to prevent consenting adults from sleeping with each other?
yes or no

I think it is ok to use force of law to keep people from owning property based on race in ethnostates, which makes your question irrelevant.

It is not about stupid boomers and their short-sighted feelings anymore. This is about preventing all-out race wars and genocide in the frightfully near future.

I think it is ok to use force of law to keep people from owning property based on race in ethnostates, which makes your question irrelevant.

It is not about stupid boomers and their short-sighted feelings anymore. This is about preventing all-out race wars and genocide in the frightfully near future.

If that is your fucked up reasoning you proffer as valid, then in turn, it would be reasonable to assert that anyone thinking like yourself should be neutered to prevent reproduction, branded on back, belly, arms and legs as sub human and imprisoned at hard, HARD LABOR for their entire 3 years of life MAX remaining BY LAW. You are one really fucked up sub human mother ******!

 

[ptbw forever]

All of the founders were white nationalists, or even ethno-nationalists who couldn't even marry a Western European who wasn't of English heritage.

Even staunch Lincoln Republicans were horrified of integration and race mixing, which is why the Democrats literally used race mixing as a political tool to successfully court Republicans away from Lincoln and the more radical elements of the party(integrationists).

This is not about your rights, it is about the good of society which you take for granted at the racial level.

so do you think that it is OK to use force of law to prevent consenting adults from sleeping with each other?
yes or no

I think it is ok to use force of law to keep people from owning property based on race in ethnostates, which makes your question irrelevant.

It is not about stupid boomers and their short-sighted feelings anymore. This is about preventing all-out race wars and genocide in the frightfully near future.

that still isnt a yes or no question
do you or do you not believe that its ok to use force to prevent and/or punish consenting adults from sleeping with each other?

Your question is only relevant to someone who lives in the past.

The world you know today is already dying. No one even needs to ban race mixing to reduce it to oblivion.

is that a yes or a no

Do you support white genocide? Yes or No?

Your question is as nonsensical to me as mine is to you. You presumably don't support the mass killing of white people, or inflicting conditions on white people designed to destroy us as a group, but you think nothing of race mixing because you were born during a time when race mixing was very rare, and the number of white children dwarfed all other groups.

I literally grew up watching Bill Clinton gleefully talk about how great it was that the long standing demographics of America were radically changing. Your dreams of what America should be was practically dead before I was even born.

 

[bitter clinging swiftie]

so do you think that it is OK to use force of law to prevent consenting adults from sleeping with each other?
yes or no

I think it is ok to use force of law to keep people from owning property based on race in ethnostates, which makes your question irrelevant.

It is not about stupid boomers and their short-sighted feelings anymore. This is about preventing all-out race wars and genocide in the frightfully near future.

that still isnt a yes or no question
do you or do you not believe that its ok to use force to prevent and/or punish consenting adults from sleeping with each other?

Your question is only relevant to someone who lives in the past.

The world you know today is already dying. No one even needs to ban race mixing to reduce it to oblivion.

is that a yes or a no

Do you support white genocide? Yes or No?

Your question is as nonsensical to me as mine is to you. You presumably don't support the mass killing of white people, or inflicting conditions on white people designed to destroy us as a group, but you think nothing of race mixing because you were born during a time when race mixing was very rare, and the number of white children dwarfed all other groups.

I literally grew up watching Bill Clinton gleefully talk about how great it was that the long standing demographics of America were radically changing. Your dreams of what America should be was practically dead before I was even born.

I grew up in south oak cliff, I was one of 12 white students at a school of 2000 people
try again
btw, I dont support any genocide, except against communists

 

[ptbw forever]

None of the founders would agree with you.

There is a huge difference between rebeling against being a servant to the king and trying to destroy racial differences because multiculturalism/multi-racialism is a total failure.

all of lthe founders would agree with me, thats why they said we all have INALIABLE RIGHTS. a man can do what the hell he wants to until such time where his actions violate the rights of another.
what right of yours am I violating by sleeping with a non-white woman?

All of the founders were white nationalists, or even ethno-nationalists who couldn't even marry a Western European who wasn't of English heritage.

Even staunch Lincoln Republicans were horrified of integration and race mixing, which is why the Democrats literally used race mixing as a political tool to successfully court Republicans away from Lincoln and the more radical elements of the party(integrationists).

This is not about your rights, it is about the good of society which you take for granted at the racial level.

so do you think that it is OK to use force of law to prevent consenting adults from sleeping with each other?
yes or no

I think it is ok to use force of law to keep people from owning property based on race in ethnostates, which makes your question irrelevant.

It is not about stupid boomers and their short-sighted feelings anymore. This is about preventing all-out race wars and genocide in the frightfully near future.

I think it is ok to use force of law to keep people from owning property based on race in ethnostates, which makes your question irrelevant.

It is not about stupid boomers and their short-sighted feelings anymore. This is about preventing all-out race wars and genocide in the frightfully near future.

If that is your fucked up reasoning you proffer as valid, then in turn, it would be reasonable to assert that anyone thinking like yourself should be neutered to prevent reproduction, branded on back, belly, arms and legs as sub human and imprisoned at hard, HARD LABOR for their entire 3 years of life MAX remaining BY LAW. You are one really fucked up sub human mother ******!

You are just scared of REAL progressivism.

I only hope you live long enough to see it in your own town.