There's been some chatter lately about Q's recent posts regarding Unity. In particular, he's implicating anon's predilections towards prejudgement based on race. This is something that is going to be a recurring theme going forward, and below is a "conversation with myself" regarding the subject. I wanted to give the folks of this board a chance/place to discuss without shitting up the Q Research General threads, because I'd rather it not be a distraction out of respect for Q and team. This started as a response in one of those thread that maxed out.

If you are an anon struggling with Q or Trump's relationship with a few folks in gov't, or celebrities in general, and the ideas that those relationships seemingly foster, this is the thread for you.

Kanye using ((( ))) lends credence to the fact that Q knows, too. Look, it's a complicated issue. Let's say you have a group of high schoolers. Some are nice, some are not. Some are cool, some are not. Some are academics, some are athletics; while 80+% of the rest of the population falls somewhere outside of those two.

There is a plan for Israel, yes. Remember, the entire purpose for the existence of Israel (according to the Bible and historical Judaism) is the rebuilding of the temple in preparation for the return of the Messiah. What else has to occur? A reformation of the hearts and minds of the people of the land in order to "pave the way" for his return. In Christianity, we believe this to be Christ. In Judaism, he hasn't arrived yet. His return would be confirmation for Christians, and his arrival would be confirmation for Jews.

The real issue is, are the Jews ready for that, yet? Currently, no. What does Q mean when they are saving Israel for last? Perhaps its a cultural revolution? Perhaps its a religious reformation? War? Invasion? These things are spoken of in Revelation.

Let's say that Israel "redeems" itself through a cultural revolution brought about by the good deeds that Q and company are exacting on the wicked currently. Let's say that they finish their work, and pave the way for the Messiah to return. Now go and read the book of Revelations.

Is it any clearer? Is this a scenario that makes the book more understandable? If so, the only question you have to answer for yourself, now, is "Are you a Pre, mid, or post tribulation believer?".

Oh, there's no fucking doubt whatsoever that the JQ has gone largely unanswered to the masses. It's true that a certain person of Bavarian heritage, a few short decades ago, was attempting to rid the problem from his own people. It's true there are vast resources to link the practice of Usury, Communism and the Bolsheviks, general cultural subversion, and hedonistic practices and parasitic behaviors as evidence of a (((problem))). But you could say the same for "urban culture" and a particular demographic in the US. Would that particular demographic behave in the manners in which they do if the environment for fostering those behaviors didn't exist any longer? Sociology and Psychology says maybe. Genetic research says likely. But look at what's going on right now…

>>1168909

Suddenly, every single one of the people on this board, as well as migrants for 4chan returning to the Q story arc in time, are finding themselves wrestling with the idea that Civic Nationalism is, indeed, Q's theme. After all, Q's veracity isn't in question here. Most of us aren't challenged to believe what Q and the people he's associated himself with are doing, or even their existence as a force for good.

He's urged us all to challenge ourselves and our prejudices to determine if all their good works are just, and threw a major monkey wrench into some people's belief that Civic Nationalism can work; despite what history has told us, REPEATEDLY, to the contrary. Even more challenging than that, is, can we find it in ourselves to give, yet, another particular group of people a "second chance", spiritually, if you will.

It's a complicated position to be a patriot in this particular timeline. That's because we all assumed that Q's statement about "saving Israel for last" meant they were going to get militaristically shit-hammered in the end; resolving all the issues in the ME introduced by the formation of a Israeli state in the middle east.

I theorize it would be a complete cultural revolution in the end. Only then, can Christ actually return (the Messiah arrive).

Of course, if you don't believe in any of that, or generally consider yourself an agnostic, it could mean something VERY ENTIRELY DIFFERENT in justifying all those suspicions you would have about a group of people who have been trying to execute particular plan that rhymes with Zalergi since the early 1900s in Europe.

Pics very much related.

In the end, I'm as much of a fan of "Nationalism" as the next. Unfortunately, it would seem we need a new strategy to combat the challenges the human race faces as we progress into a time period where we should be concentrating on exploring the stars instead of fighting each other. Nationalism, especially the ethno-centric kind, would likely lead to more wars over ideologies and "turf" instead of uniting us in our endeavors to challenge our prejudices for the "common good". Simultaneously, the USA cannot be a bastion for the example of unity without securing its own nation's borders from harm.

By no means am I thinking Q is telling us "Go make a bunch of mixed babies", but I do think he's telling us to set prejudices aside to defeat a common enemy. After that mission is accomplished, we'll figure the rest of it out.

Prioritization is the word that comes to mind.

>>1168924

Scott Adams recent video post tickles the brain cells. Our tendencies are to recognize patterns. The bane of this piece of machinery in our thinking is that patterns are, sometimes, seemingly more relatable than they should be. He discusses this in the video linked here.

Scott proposes that "history" does NOT repeat itself. Is our perception that it does lend more credence to prejudice tendencies, in our minds, than it should? Are we looking at environmental factors playing a much larger role in the formation of our perceptions of ourselves, and more importantly, each other, than they should?

I am willing to accept Q's challenge. Are you?

>>1172615

Glad you brought this up. The progression of events in Revelation indicate what you are saying is correct. What if what Q is doing sets the stage for that? I'm not saying it's not a good thing, but keeping your focus on the Lord is more important than any one person; or group of people, for that matter. If you are a believer in the Word, then Q's success would usher in the series of events that bring us into the tribulation, but also closer to the Lord's return.

If you are agnostic, or don't put any stock into the events in Revelation, then Q's actions are taking us out of the bondage world "masters" working behind the scenes to control everyone through international banks, and prey upon people with cults. Still, good things.

>>1172843

OK, but what about that fact that there is/was, indeed, a plan to wipe out entire cultures in order to establish a hierarchy of people to be ruled over? Q has insisted on that the entire world will be freed from oppression when it's all said and done, but what about the execution of the Kalergi plan as it stands? Are European countries suddenly going to kick out millions of migrants that are currently setup and living in Europe?

Regardless of your view of whether the article is written with racist undertones, the historical fact is this exists, and in our view of current events, we can see it unfolding into a reality. How can Europe maintain its identity if they are irrevocably forced into a multicultural/pluralistic society now? I have a hard time finding an answer in modern civilization or examples from history that didn't end in complete and utter failure.

>>1174173

>>1174009

I agree that hate is most definitely not the answer, and working together for the common cause of defeating evil is worthy and noble. What do we do after that, though? What instances in history are there of successful multicultural societies that lasted beyond their need of eliminating a common foe?

>>1174503

>Civic nationalism will fail.

It can last for a time, though. Don't you think? Again, we're all here because we believe in the mission of Q. We're trusting the plan. If that plan involves Civic Nationalism (whether it's a means to an end, or the end goal itself), then we have to execute on plan.

The only alternative I could see for countries like the US, Canada, and now Germany, UK, and Sweden is Balkanization. Who wants to live like that? Unless there's some incentive for folks to return to their home nations. Even then, the US would still have to arbitrate its own outcome because many in the US, that are culturally different, were born in the US.

Let's say Q's plan comes to fruition. The massive groups of migrants that fled the ME and Africa can now return to peace, safety, and prosperity in their home lands. Are European countries going to force them back? We all know that, for the most part, they aren't going to want to leave.

I just don't think our problems are going to end with the cabal. The world has been irrevocably changed by the previous 8/16/32 years of an utter lack of leadership in the US (Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush Sr.). The impact has been vast.

Where do we go from there?

>>1175385

I agree with your sentiments, especially regarding immigration, but I think you might have missed the point of the thread. I intentionally made this thread here to keep from distracting from Q Research, but the point of it is to discuss something Q brought up recently with his post regarding unity.

Is Civic Nationalism a sustainable type of society?

>>1179808

No apologies necessary.

Not to take the conversation too far into the religious, it is a part of the world politic that I think should be considered. For the believer to reconcile the current trend of events in the Q-sphere, it's a head-scratcher for sure. I can only think that we're either setting up the stage for way into the future (if Q's great awakening happens, there's no limit to the potential in human progress). In my view on this, it's possibly one of two things:

1. The book of Revelations wasn't intended as a world wide reading – (Think Noah's flood wasn't worldwide, but perhaps limited to just the middle east/turkey) but instead is more focused on a very particular portion of the earth (at least the trumpets and bowls of wrath parts). If you look at it this way, that particular portion of the earth have been experiencing Tribulations for a while now. If that's the case, then Q and team are working to bring the end of Tribulation (think millennial reign of Christ). This is hard to reconcile with the beast, mark, etc. It can be done, but it's hard.

1. Scary to think, but perhaps we're helping Q machinate Revelations (to happen some time after all their work is done), and the Tribulation will really start after that.

For the agnostic, I would imagine we're looking, finally, at the fall of the cabal and true human progress to follow; then history takes us to the next stage. That is, as long as people can come to terms with living together in a world that has been irrevocably changed by the past few presidencies.

At any rate, and back on point, my real concern is over the viability/volatility of Civic Nationalism. Can it work? Has it ever worked? If so, what made it fail in the past?

>>1179808

>>1181860

I guess what I'm hoping for is for Q, or someone with Q's views, to come share some ideas on this. If a "Treatise on Civic Nationalism" can be birthed by discourse, I'd be interested in being a part of that conversation. It's going to take a great deal more than a PSA instructing everyone to practice "Peace, Love and Happiness".

>>1182353

It doesn't have to be violent, I think. Amicable solutions can be reached. However, if we just allowed people to "follow their instincts", there's going to be a (long term) self-inflicted balkanization unless a better plan is put forth.

Look at South Africa. Look at Brazil. Talk to people from these countries and listen to what they say about how it got to where it is in their countries.

>>1182469

Categorically untrue. As someone who grew up as a minority in a largely black area, I can assure you that even in childhood, people pick out your differences and rip you apart for it. Not all, but the majority. We are all different. That's OK, too; nothing wrong with that. It's the refusal to acknowledge and work with those differences that perpetuate the problems that lead to conflict. Even if you try your damnedest to let your children grow up and form their own opinions, they will come to you one day and ask questions like:

1. Why does "so and so" do and act like this while others don't?

2. Why does "so and so" always have issues with this person or that person?

I have my own viewpoints on things based on personal experience, and extensive reading of history. The Bible itself contains a plethora of examples of segregative (instructional?) material. However, I can assure you that I've remained entirely neutral in my conversations with my young ones regarding the questions they ask from time to time regarding this specifically. I want them to form their own opinions and relationships.

However, go to the school yard during recess. Visit your kids during lunch break. Now go to a middle/high school. Visit a college campus and glance in the classrooms. What do you notice? Why? Do you honestly think everyone is getting a daily rant from their parents about those "evil white people" or "ignorant blacks" or "soulless asians"?

Maybe less than 1% are. The rest of them?

>>1183683

>where do the indigenous people go

Countries like the US, accepting any immigration at all (but in the past was filtered by bringing in harder working or brighter people), are part of the problem. Brain drain from the countries that need that sort of resource the most is their greatest detriment. You could say that the US accepting immigrant (to an extent) is most harmful to the underdeveloped nations of the world.

Singapore is an interesting example to bring up. One would argue that it "works" because they are very strict in not only creating laws, but truly enforcing them. Another would be their demographics are mostly (73% or higher) Chinese. The only significantly different demographic (yes, I'm generalizing here) living there would be Indian. Here's the real kicker:

33.2% Buddhism

18.8% Christianity

18.5% No religion

14.0% Islam

10.0% Taoism and folk religion

5.0% Hinduism

0.6% Others

Buddhism could be akin to secular nationalism, and more than a third of the country ascribes/adheres to that way of thinking. Where Islam normally starts taking a real grip on a nation is at the 10% marker, yet, Singapore doesn't seem as heavily affected as it probably should.

Now, this could be conjecture (probably is), but does Singapore have some sort of system of laws that limit people from holding public office, or counter-subversion regulations in place to keep their country from being overrun by an invasion of ideology?

What's the common thread among the majority of them that keeps them from erupting into chaos? Look at that list of religions. There are as many people that are irreligious as there are Christian. There are significantly more that are Buddhist (a group of folks that generally get along well with anyone) than anything else. But more revealing yet is the staggering number of Islamists, yet when you think Singapore, you don't think "Big Black Cube of American Hating Jihad". Perhaps it's happening and we don't realize it, or perhaps that brand of Islam they practice is far more tame than we know.

>>1187388

>do you even know what 'indigenous' means?

I presumed you were using the word incorrectly; I apologize. If you are talking about Native Americans, then I'm afraid you have a moot point (to an extent). They have their lands that are federally protected. For a lack of a better explanation, Native Americans could live in their "bubbles" from here until the end of time and never be affected by rampant immigration into the remainder of the US. Well, that is, until the welfare funds run out.

>>1188192

Let's just say it's the current theme. UNITY. Why do you think everyone is shunning the race baiters with vigilance? Previously, that sort of talk was brushed under the rug. Now, any distinctness in creed/color is being tossed aside in the message of unity (for good reason). The question is, is Civic Nationalism sustainable, or should it be considered a means to an end?

>>1188997

Exactly. Glad to see I'm not the only one struggling with this.

>>1189594

>civic nationalism doesn't mean you have to accept unlimited immigration

I never said that. What I said is that's the current trend, and now we're being told that civic nationalism is what we're being told by Q to embrace in order to accomplish the goal of removing corruption, and taking our nation to the next level. The question is, CAN WE DO IT?

>>1189688

Manipulative? I think you are reading too much into it. If you have a classroom of diverse individuals, and your teacher says "Set aside your differences until you get this figured out" then what your teacher is proposing is you find a common goal that each of your diverse groups wants to achieve (make it a passing grade). How can you do that? Work together cohesively to achieve your goal (set aside your differences).

That is the essence of civic nationalism.

>>1190780

You just summarized my greatest fear.

>>1191149

>As a true blooded Nordsman, I'll ask you a simple question. Give me one good example of a successful white ethnostate that managed to transcend and unite different white ethnic groups in a single country for more than a century.

>In the past two millenia. Yea, good luck with that.

This is what I'm asking in OP. Has it ever been done (a) and (b) if not, then is it something that can be done?

What would it take?

>>1192629

Sowell is one of my favorites. He always seems to have something incredibly insightful to say about a wide range of subjects.

>>1192685

It's more complicated than that, but I get what you are saying about messages of hate in general. Being astute about obvious patterns in certain groups is one thing (it's called statistics), but to label everyone with a "-stein" or "-berg" in their name evil is ignorant, and generalizing.

You cannot deny that a subset of that group brought about the Weimar, Bolsheviks, and have a significant amount of control over media, news, banking, entertainment, porn, and other industries. All of that is well documented. It's also notable that while in-group preference is something that isn't allowed in hiring practices, it is apparent that, again, a certain subset of that group, gets away with it.

We have to be careful not to put on blinders while we refuse to hate.

>>1192331

Germany has done it, yes. Switzerland? It's a bit more diverse than you think:

https:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switzerland#Demographics

What amazes me is Switzerland's gun rights and seemingly nonexistent crime rates.

>>1193975

>We're heading towards a truly merits-based society free of censorship and oppression, we'll invariably win.

I haven't thought about this. I suppose I've become quite the cynic at my age, but I like this POV. A truly merit based society would self-cleanse. I'd like to think that this idea isn't overly "glass half full".

>>1197314

That is a concern I have, for certain.

>>1200276

I'm not sure you can maintain that position given all the revelations of Q and parallel discovery by anons from 4chan and 8chan. There's all sorts of shills here. Take what you need for self validation, and ignore the rest.

>>1204778

Q has very specifically mentioned patience. Off topic for this thread, but I was rereading pic related and it reminded me of all the questions Q tried to field about Macron. They are scared, and Trump is flipping them one at a time because taking down the cabal is going to mean a WW effort.

>>1209851

That's an interesting take on how ethnonationalism can progress. I think, however, for many people that buy into ethnonationalism, it's more complicated inasmuch as their views on how groups of people do not necessarily integrate well, but they can cohabitate with well defined borders. Think neighborhoods with fences. Good fences make good neighbors (I cannot tell you enough how true this is).

I think what you describe could be partly attributed to ethno-centric thinking, and was greatly exemplified in the generations prior to and eventual creation of the UK. Their aspirations for nationalism turned to familial dominance of their own people, and eventually struggles for dominance of the crown.

I'm not sure that's where other examples in history would have lead if they were allowed to progress without outside intervention (2nd/3rd reichs, for example). I mean, look at Japan, for example.

Irrespective of the system of government, they have had a tight grip on ethnocentrism, and this has kept them very tightly knitted in regards to culture and identity. Some would argue that this fact alone is why Japan is still around after getting not ONE but TWO nuclear strikes against them during WWII.

>>1217932

I just learned that Kanye tweeted Jordan Peterson yesterday (4/26). Does anyone see where this is going, yet?