An important realisation:

You and your people do not have any sustainable rights, or sustainable self-determination, while governed by an ideology or reality that allows others, not you, or of your people, to settle amongst your people in great number. Or where your people do not possess a sustainable super majority & are not to be returned to it (in that space or any subset of it or alternative to it).

If a people are ruled by a large mass of people living distant from them (another city/state/nation), or from different people (racially, culturally, religiously) imported to their city/state/nation, there is no self-rule and self-determination realisable for those who were on the receiving end, until such happenstance is reversed.

If what happens in your town, is determined by people geographically distant to you, or culturally, religiously or racially non-aligned to you, and those like you, you do not possess self-determination. You are not self-ruling. You are being ruled.

People not like you, are making the rules you must live by. They are making the rules to suit themselves, not you, and not those like you.

This is the inexorable reality of what is. At odds with anti-racism and a happy future where (we all rule together as one), but totally in line with reality, and the wisdom of our elders, and the founders of our nations.

People don't want us to understand the above, because it prevents people having power over others distant to them. Because realising the above lets us KEEP our power, regain it and retain it. Retain our RIGHTS.

So it is labelled hate, and something that has to be worked against because it is 'racist'.

We need to be wiser than that. Self-rule is only possible where a group is in power, not ruled by others who are not them, or not of them, or not of their people, or their culture and civilisation.

Review any revolution in history or fight for freedom. It verifies the above. Only where it is like ruling like, that determination is upheld.

If your people are 5 votes amongst 15, to determine what happens in your own land and space, you do not possess self-determination. You are being ruled, no matter what skin of democracy and explanation is layered on top.

Each having their own space is not hatred. Denying a people a right to keep such a space is.

>>16527914

You referenced Q's position. I talked to various takes on what Q's position might be.

I did not talk to what your position was.

So your commentary about "my imagination of you" is unfounded.

I did not talk about your views or spend time considering them. I talked to the comment you made on Q.

I speak out when people endorse anti-racism, because anti-racism is a vehicle for the racial replacement and dispossession of my people, and denial of their rights and self-determination. In short, anti-racism is a vehicle for genocide, and for the furtherance of the plans of the elite.

Something they have propagandised in, and rode to a nearly unassailable position, that is extraordinarily bad for ALL human beings and groups, inclusive of my own.

***

And which ultimately is the true patriot? The person actually in alignment with the founding fathers, that multi-cultism was death (hence a nation for "free white people" with laws to deny the enfranchisement of others), or the person in alignment with the ELITE PROPAGANDISED IN POSITION of USA as a multicult melting pot for all?

i.e is it truly patriotic to adopt the globalist anti-racist position, or the founding fathers racist position?

Do you want to be patriotic and defend the genocidal & dysfunctional abomination the elite turned USA into?

Or do you want to be patriotic and defend the position and intent of the founding fathers? Because they are two different things.

And if you are for patriotically defending the anti-White racist project of "anti-racism" as the elite wishes, do you at least understand that in doing so you are the exact opposite of a patriot in the traditional sense, but actually working against the founding intent of your nation?

I patriotically stand for my nation being given away to foreigners is an interesting contradiction to be able to maintain harmony with Anon.

>>16528048

Think about a person saying they were a Tibetan patriot, while endorsing (Han) Chinese rule of Tibet. Would you think them odd/misguided?

Would you think them odd to say "a Han Chinese is just as Tibetan as an actual ethnic Tibetan"?

i.e. the people that actually founded and set the culture for the region?

And if they would be odd to do so, why do you think you should appear as anything but the same?

If the people you welcome as "just as American as you" are okay with the founding people of America being replaced, and other people doing the replacing, and you willingly stand with such people, where does that place you?

If one side's position is replace heritage America, and your side is everyone that has replaced heritage America is just as American as heritage Americans, and you won't remove them… where does that lead in the end?

One side keeps filling the place up with non-Americans, and the other accepts them as Americans. Seems that only leaves actual heritage Americans being replaced no?

Funny definition of patriot. Looks like it matches traitor in any traditional sense.

Imagine a war where one side keeps all the territory gained each battle, and the other never takes any back… but claims they are fighting hard and are patriotic in allowing an eventual total dispossession. Just don't look too close am I right? Just accept the virtue signals, don't look at the reality of where they lead…