>>16739063

>Racists hate unity

Nope. I am racist. Racial unity is fine, so long as it does not come at the expense of my own people.

i.e. unity around coming together and having a peaceful olympics.. fine.

unity around everyone being able to stay and take advantage of welfare in White nations… not fine.

Unity around each race ruling its own nations, as founded by their forefathers.. fine.

Unity around White nations being a home for tens to hundreds of millions of non-Whites without deep connection to our nations… not fine.

It is unity around X (stuff that is bad) that is the problem kike, not unity with other races per se.

The racist position as described above is the only rational one. To fail to adhere to the above is quite literally insane… which is why it requires mass 24/7 mass media support to be maintained.

>>16739218

>God's people don't divide themselves along arbitrary, man-made, lines.

God created the variety of life Anon. Those divisions were made by God.

He constructed life in the universe in such a way that GENETIC INHERITANCE has meaning. And loss of genes and genetic integrity delivers loss. And thus a NEED for its protection and maintenance.

If he wanted the world a different way, he could have created life without a genetic basis (he is god after all). He did not. So he chose for each 'set' of life to be dependant on its genes, and its SUSTAINABILITY to be based upon it being able to stick within its group to pass on those genes.

God also provided that life should evolve an instinct for self-preservation. And racism ALIGNS WITH this instinct. Putting an in-group over an outgroup, where failure to do so would jeopardise the sustainability of the in-group.

Those that do not follow this rule, disappear.

Do you think God wants people to follow a set of behaviours that see them throw away their existence, or that RESPECT HIS CREATION by respecting THEIR DUTY to maintain the existence of what he caused to be created?

Racists are in alignment with God Anon, by following the patterns and rewards and punishments he laid down in the laws of his universe. There laws that govern physical reality.

Suicide is a sin Anon. So is racial suicide. Which is exactly what the path you would choose for others leads them too. A path OUT OF existence.

And propaganda aimed at delivering just that.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

You believe that racism is bad, because you let the tv and pop culture (created by aliens that hate goyim and wish them enslaved or dead) program you.

If you observed God's creation you'd see he loves diversity of life, and life being able to KEEP ITSELF diverse. That comes from separation Anon, not mixing to sameness.

There will be no Grey Squirrels if the American Red Squirrel is facilitated to keep moving and breeding in the land of the English Grey.

And they only got their by ARTIFICIAL means Anon, man made boats and planes, not God's act.

>>16739230

>even low IQ shills know you can't indict collective nouns

Indict is a legal term, Anon.

And legalism is a path to injustice, not justice.

The natural right to fight for a sustainable existence and a people to SELF-RULE, on the lands of their forefathers, that they are deeply connected to, stands above any legal right or process.

Natural rights dictate the right to protect one's own people against the agents that harm them, and the VECTORS and WELLSPRINGS of the vectors that work against their sustained existence, especially where these have been inserted INTO the aforementioned lands by people FOREIGN to them in origin.

Not all Jews are guilty, but the vast majority are (e.g. any Jew that supports mass immigration into White nations, even if only legal immigration, is guilty of treason against the nation and people they reside amongst.. this counts at least 99.8% of Jews already).

And Jews have CONSISTENTLY behaved in such manner throughout history, to indicate that if they were to be allowed to remain, even the few "good" ones, that the situation would repeat to much greater harm.

And moving a people on, to LIVE WITH THEIR OWN KIND, is not doing some great injustice to them. On the contrary, it enables and delivers a much more intergenerational sustainable existence for their line than having them remain. So no LASTING damage is done, unless by choice of those people and their kids themselves (such as to try to force others to accept them staying and having their offspring able to compete to harm their hosts).

Look at what you desire. A people alien to others, with homes elsewhere, who are doing great harm to others, and who have a history of doing immense harm, to be allowed to stay, even if the consequence of that would be the dispossession and harm of a much larger group down the track.

It is pure selfishness Anon.

Just let each race have its own space, that is far fairer than Asia for Asians, Israel for Jews and White nations for everyone.

You ask for something fair on an individual level, at the expense of a whole race of people being harmed.

But Anon, you ask of another race too much, and much more than is fair to ask. So no. Take your abusive request elsewhere. The answer is no.

>>16739279

The argument inherent in the image you have chosen is that DEEPLY SETTLED AND LOCALLY CONNECTED PEOPLE (for generations) have a right to fight off and see off later invaders without such a connection.

And yes, I agree. People with deep connection to a place have a right to it people without deep connection, or just with a shallow connection do not.

More than 90% of all non-Whites currently residing in majority White lands globally immigrated after 1965. They are not ancient historic American Indians.

>>16739283

Seeing humans as being all the same has no more logic to it than seeing all canines as the same, despite the canine family including the Hyena, the Wolf and the Chihuahua.

Identities nest Anon. Pretending that subdivisions do not exist is a political propaganda act, not one that is rational.

>>16739283

Ultimately you request that people deny their own God given senses, and discernment capabilities, and deny the reality of the variety of God's creations, and variety of life itself, in order to please a propagandised in version of what you ASSUME God wants, that has been inoculated in you by Jews that hate certain varieties of life, and use propaganda around unity to see some of those varieties dispossessed and removed.

But I say unto you, with the world being God's creation, it was within his power to make it ACTUALLY the same, if he wanted it perceived as such.

But he chose not to. Ergo having variety is something that pleases him. Ergo it having variety services his purpose. Ergo it RETAINING its variety is pleasing to him. Ergo acting to see it retained, by doing what is necessary to keep one's own group's existence retained (which balances with other group's doing the same) is pleasing to God.

What could be more unpleasant to God than seeing a form of life throw its life away because some talking heads on tv that hate White folk convinced them that throwing away their existence and rights would please God?

>>16739402

Your comment says something only about who you are Anon, not who I am, as much as it may have been meant otherwise.

>>16739420

>Division as an axiom drives the system to become inconsistent

I will repeat. Unity can be made around ignorance and denial (that difference exists) and acceptance of a process of White dispossession & genocide.

Or unity can be around preventing White dispossession and genocide and made EYES OPEN, AWARE OF difference.

You ask for unity based around ignorance and acceptance of harm.

I offer unity around MUTUAL RESPECT and rights, that ALL DECENT PEOPLE can agree to, and the vast majority would.

I offer unity that is eyes open, truthful, and respectful of the needs of all major groups.

You ask for unity built of ignorance and denial of reality.

Sorry Anon, there is only one persona acting for good there. And it is not the one asking for people to find unity in denying reality and being ignorant.

Interestingly that is EXACTLY what the media of the elite asks of the general population though isn't it. Funny you parrot their words and approach. Perhaps you have not moved very far from their programming at all? Or serve them, not actual unity?

Certainly your pressing against a person who says he has no problem unifying with other races, except with one condition, that unity does not involve acceptance of White genocide or the vectors from which it arises… indicates something doesn't it.

Unity without that outcome is not the one you are looking for, for I offer the same otherwise.

>>16739533

Yes, the peace the Cabal has only ever offered to Whites is the one we we willingly die for it, and are abused by it, and enslaved by it. And we have no business accepting such a peace. And it is a great shame that many have, and many non-Whites and propagandised Whites work to see that we have none by allowing themselves to be the vectors the cabal use to harm and dispossess us.

War first, to restore balance, then peace. We work for a peace that could truly provide for all races. The others sleepwalking into the ruin of all, and the empowerment of only one group - none of us or them, just the one's pulling the strings.

>>16739536

This is a fancy attempt to discredit by false association. But sorry, it doesn't wash.

Biological reality can be empirically measured.

The biological reality that the sustainable passing on of genes (and phenotypes) requires selective IN-GROUP breeding, can be measured entirely outside of the political and subjective, via its application to others in the animal kingdom.

ALL species and sub-species of mammals, for their sustainable existence, depend upon an in-group orientation, non-outbreeding, and control of the resources required to maintain their group, their numbers, and survival.

That is, each group and sub-group, needs to maintain control of resources and territory, and orientate to its own needs.

Apply this ACTUAL REALITY to humans, and you are led to the position I espouse.

Deny it, and you do not do any good, just send any group that listens, out of existence. BIOLOGICALLY.

This requires no analysis of cultural differences, or differences in any arising racial biological culture.

Now those things almost certainly do exist, and are linked, but they are not relevant for this most important point.

My approach leads to each group being able to survive. An approach other than mine one or more groups being physically replaced and dispossessed. ie genocide.

A group being sent out of existence by being encouraged to follow a path that sees that outcome is genocide Anon.

That is physical reality.

And you seem very attached to getting that to come about.

Question is why though? Why not entertain some paths that provide that each race can keep some space and rights, why so intent on putting one particular race on a path where it is harmed?

>>16739681

>You keep falsely projecting 'unity is a logic of denial of reality', as if unity logic is imaginary while division logic is the only real logic.

No Anon. This is a very poor attempt at argument by you.

I did not make a case that unity is a denial of reality. I said that unity based around denying that DIFFERENCES exist, and a group of people, are harmed by denying the relevance of these differences is a unity of ignorance.

Whilst unity around not denying difference, and not embracing a path that harmed Whites was also possible.

People can UNIFY on position X or position Y. This is a choice, regardless of however people see themselves or who they and others actually are.

You ask for unity on position X - denial of differences, which has as a natural consequence the continued displacement, replacement, dispossession, loss of self-determination, and genocide of a SELECTION of the people on earth.

A say why not unify on a position that does not do that.. it really is was simple as that.

And what is notable is your attempt to run away from that. When for any person GENUINELY good and honourable, the position to support would be clear, and require no running any from.

When faced with a choice between running toward genocide of a people, or away from it, you run towards it.

Which is very jewish of you, or very White programmed by Jews, or very non-Jewish minority group that hates or is ambivalent to Whites. Take your pick.

Humans whether they pick X or Y are still united as humans Anon. It is just that one is separating themselves by their lack of care for the other humans, and that is you, not I.

>>16739721

>Nobody in history has ever made a proof that the logic of the minds of white people categorically differs from the logic of the minds of black people, or that the logic of the minds of rich people categorically differs from the logic of the minds of poor people.

>You're referencing biology but you're not linking anything in biology to proving polylogism based on biology.

Again, you seek to take the argument to a place it didn't go.

Biologically groups require defence and maintenance of their niche, and selective in-group focussed breeding to BIOLOGICALLY maintain existence across generations.

This requires no proof of difference of mind. That very likely does exist, but its existence or not is entirely separate to the argument, and irrelevant to it.

It does not matter if the Grey Squirrel or the Red Squirrel think differently. The fact remains that the Red and the Grey have the same needs to (sustainably) survive and exist across generations, as every other mammal does, and this is not furthered or managed by having one unable to defend its own space, and unable to pushback the other.

Difference exist. This creates subsets. Denial of this is ignorance.

For these subsets to sustainably exist, certain criteria need to be met.

One can unify over the criteria that allow each to survive sustainably, and maintain themselves and their rights, or side with unity around criteria that will see one replaced and dissolved, even if that was not the intent, it being the reality of not unifying around the other approach.

Again the question to you: why not unify on the approach that works for all?

Why insist on unity on the approach that delivers genocide to Whites?

Why dispose of the Red Squirrel, when, by simply stopping the process of their replacement, both can sustainably exist?

https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2656.2004.00791.x

>>16739738

All you do is discredit yourself and your people and prove the case agains them.

One person is arguing against the visible and active replacement of their people and denial of their group rights.

The other is playing a game of "yeah but what are your people really".

In no different a manner than the very worst colonialist determining to wipe out an Indigenous tribe may consider their rights. But are they REALLY people, objectively? Who is to say?

No, you just discredit yourself.

It marks you, to any human that is decent, as severely disfigured. Sorry for you Anon.

Your people have allowed themselves to become horrors through their own acts against others, and then feeling the blowback from that experience.

Tempered by the powers of evolution to be and think in a horrific and terribly blind fashion.

Simple humanity is just a step away if you but knew it.

You just have to CARE about others.

It is very simple for most of the rest of us. So sorry for your people it is so difficult.