You Need Government! Freedom is Slavery!

[iOWNme]

Another fantastic analysis by Stefan Molyneux.

There are members here who parrot back the same idiotic ramblings about 'Government' and why we need it. Here, Stefan breaks down all of the usual 'excuses' as to why need to be violently dominated by a small gang of criminals, in order to be protected by a 'different' small gang of violent criminals.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcq-6NZv_ho

[Shami-Amourae]

Anarchism doesn't acknowledge race, so it doesn't work unless you're in very tiny communities. Because of this Libertarianism and Anarchism will both lead to Totalitarianism since your White country will be flooded with mud and nothing will be left for you or your people.

Most Anarchists/Libertarians I come across have the Progressive view of race and therefore are just a different blend of Progressives.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4geQplQO32E


The USA used to the model Libertarian country. Things started going down hill when Blacks were treated as equals as Whites and then everything has gone down hill there as we get further and further enriched with Diversity.


Look at Detroit. Typical Republican/Libertarian response is that it died because of BIG GOVERNMENT:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hhJ_49leBw

Detroit is 85% Black. It's an African city. That's what happens when a White city turns mud.

[7th trump]

Another fantastic analysis by Stefan Molyneux.

There are members here who parrot back the same idiotic ramblings about 'Government' and why we need it. Here, Stefan breaks down all of the usual 'excuses' as to why need to be violently dominated by a small gang of criminals, in order to be protected by a 'different' small gang of violent criminals.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcq-6NZv_ho

Ohhh...how nice.....a video coming from a guy who clings to his government wellfare and retirement program making him a "federal personnel"....see 5usc 522a(13).



5usc 522a(13)
(13)the term “Federal personnel” means officers and employees of the Government of the United States, members of the uniformed services (including members of the Reserve Components), individuals entitled to receive immediate or deferred retirement benefits under any retirement program of the Government of the United States (including survivor benefits).

You make yourself into a joke for not understanding what makes you subject to the government.

[Santa]

It doesn't make a whit of difference what you call a government, whether it's self government or totalitarian government, it's still a government dictated by the laws of commerce as defined by the monetary/market system. The priests of which preside in the holy shrines known as Central Banks.

[iOWNme]

Ohhh...how nice.....a video coming from a guy who clings to his government wellfare and retirement program making him a "federal personnel"....see 5usc 522a(13).

Except for the fact that he is Canadian and lives in Canada. LOL

You didnt even watch the video. You cannot rebut ANYTHING Stefan laid out in this video because it is based on rationality, logic and evidence. These are thing that thinking men use to figure out the world, not superstitions and dogmatic teachings that make absolutely no sense when applied in principle to reality.


You make yourself into a joke for not understanding what makes you subject to the government.

Did you find this 'Holy Truth' of your by searching mindlessly through the scribbles of your Masters?

How about we debate this live?

[iOWNme]

Anarchism doesn't acknowledge race,

Because Anarchist are smart enough to realize that skin color DOES NOT alter morality.


so it doesn't work unless you're in very tiny communities.

Anarchist are also smart enough to realize that the size of a group, whether it is 1 or a million DOES NOT alter morality.


Because of this Libertarianism and Anarchism will both lead to Totalitarianism since your White country will be flooded with mud and nothing will be left for you or your people.

Another Statist mythology: If we dont have any rulers, that will lead to rulers.

A contradiction of GIANT purportions.



Most Anarchists/Libertarians I come across have the Progressive view of race and therefore are just a different blend of Progressives.

So people who do not IMAGINE that skin color alters morality have 'progressive' views? Instead of actually drilling down to the principles of anything, you stay on the surface using the color you see or the religion you see as your guide to being human. And tyhis seems like a totally sane and rational viewpoint to you? What is the difference between you and the Zionist? You both think YOUR race is the chosen one. PUKE.

If i asked you to describe yourself to me, would you use your skin color, eye color, height, weight, etc? Or would you tell me about your character, goals and achievments, aspirations, etc?



The USA used to the model Libertarian country. Things started going down hill when Blacks were treated as equals as Whites and then everything has gone down hill there as we get further and further enriched with Diversity.

No it didnt. It used to enslave black people, it robbed its citizens on day 1, it extorted, raped and plundered many individuals. And you have the nerve to call this 'Libertarian'.



Look at Detroit. Typical Republican/Libertarian response is that it died because of BIG GOVERNMENT:
Detroit is 85% Black. It's an African city. That's what happens when a White city turns mud.

So the color of peoples skin is more powerful than the system that controls the amount of money in circulation and controls the interest rate? WOW, you have a pretty wild IMAGINATION.

And if Detroit was full of white people and was 'flourishing' you wouldnt have any problem with the theft, violence and destruction that comes with such 'floursihment' from the STATE?

[Shami-Amourae]

Because Anarchist are smart enough to realize that skin color DOES NOT alter morality.

Source (http://www.colorofcrime.com/colorofcrime2005.html)
The Color of Crime

Race, Crime, and Justice in America — Second, Expanded Edition, 2005
Major Findings:


Police and the justice system are not biased against minorities.



Crime Rates


Blacks are seven times more likely than people of other races to commit murder, and eight times more likely to commit robbery.
When blacks commit crimes of violence, they are nearly three times more likely than non-blacks to use a gun, and more than twice as likely to use a knife.
Hispanics commit violent crimes at roughly three times the white rate, and Asians commit violent crimes at about one quarter the white rate.
The single best indicator of violent crime levels in an area is the percentage of the population that is black and Hispanic.



Interracial Crime


Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year involving blacks and whites, blacks commit 85 percent and whites commit 15 percent.
Blacks commit more violent crime against whites than against blacks. Forty-five percent of their victims are white, 43 percent are black, and 10 percent are Hispanic. When whites commit violent crime, only three percent of their victims are black.
Blacks are an estimated 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against a white than vice versa, and 136 times more likely to commit robbery.
Blacks are 2.25 times more likely to commit officially-designated hate crimes against whites than vice versa.



Gangs


Only 10 percent of youth gang members are white.
Hispanics are 19 times more likely than whites to be members of youth gangs. Blacks are 15 times more likely, and Asians are nine times more likely.



Incarceration


Between 1980 and 2003 the US incarceration rate more than tripled, from 139 to 482 per 100,000, and the number of prisoners increased from 320,000 to 1.39 million.
Blacks are seven times more likely to be in prison than whites. Hispanics are three times more likely.






Anarchist are also smart enough to realize that the size of a group, whether it is 1 or a million DOES NOT alter morality.

Very few people want real freedom. The larger your group, the more likely a Statist(s) will take over. Freedom is an anomaly, not a norm.




Another Statist mythology: If we dont have any rulers, that will lead to rulers.

A contradiction of GIANT purportions.

Are the illegal immigrants flooding into the USA more likely to vote/want Socialism or Capitalism/Free Markets?




So people who do not IMAGINE that skin color alters morality have 'progressive' views? Instead of actually drilling down to the principles of anything, you stay on the surface using the color you see or the religion you see as your guide to being human. And tyhis seems like a totally sane and rational viewpoint to you? What is the difference between you and the Zionist? You both think YOUR race is the chosen one. PUKE.

I agree with Zionism (the Dictionary definition,) because I believe the Jewish people have a right to a homeland of their own. I also believe Whites, Blacks, Mestizos, Asians and so on have a right to a homeland. Zionism has over time is just a fancy word for Jewish Supremacism, which I'm apposed to. Here's the actual definition in the dictionary:
Zi·on·ism

noun \ˈzī-ə-ˌni-zəm\ : political support for the creation and development of a Jewish homeland in Israel



So why can't Jews have their own homeland? More power to them. Just stop parasitizing off of our people. If we had Nationalism they wouldnt be around to parasite on us, they'd have to parasite on themselves. :)







If i asked you to describe yourself to me, would you use your skin color, eye color, height, weight, etc? Or would you tell me about your character, goals and achievments, aspirations, etc?

I'm a White male, and consider myself to be a National-Libertarian. Basically I'm a Nationalist who wants a limited government. The opposite of Nationalism is Globalism by the way.





No it didnt. It used to enslave black people, it robbed its citizens on day 1, it extorted, raped and plundered many individuals. And you have the nerve to call this 'Libertarian'.

When you compare it to every other nation that's existed in human history, yes. And I don't think anyone thinks slavery was a good idea. Now we are stuck with them.



So the color of peoples skin is more powerful than the system that controls the amount of money in circulation and controls the interest rate? WOW, you have a pretty wild IMAGINATION.

And if Detroit was full of white people and was 'flourishing' you wouldnt have any problem with the theft, violence and destruction that comes with such 'floursihment' from the STATE?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ui-Zw8boHD4

http://www.resist.com/CARTOON%20GALLERY/NIGGERS/nig_image41.jpg

[Horn]

Commerce tax is elective, revenue tax is not.

There was much more Freedom in us before the I.R.S., we had a choice to support, or not.

[7th trump]

Except for the fact that he is Canadian and lives in Canada. LOL

You didnt even watch the video. You cannot rebut ANYTHING Stefan laid out in this video because it is based on rationality, logic and evidence. These are thing that thinking men use to figure out the world, not superstitions and dogmatic teachings that make absolutely no sense when applied in principle to reality.



Did you find this 'Holy Truth' of your by searching mindlessly through the scribbles of your Masters?

How about we debate this live?

Yep you're correct...I didn't watch the video because its the same bullshit you keep peddling.
We all know we are contained...so the question is what did you do to allow them to contain you?
This is why I keep asking you why you keep using the ssn that contains you to their system.
If you think you own yourself then why are you using the number when theres laws and their respective regulations saying nobody has to use the number that enslaves them to the system.
You believe you are being forced to be enslaved when in actuality its you doing this to yourself.

Open a thread here on this site and I'll debate you.

[singular_me]

Shami, I dont get it, sorry. All immigration issues on this planet are orchestrated to spread conflicts and xenophobia as a distraction. if the USA hadnt endorsed slavery, many of the blacks would still be in africa. Doesnt make much sense to resolve the issue caused by rulers with another bunch of rulers.

However there only are 2 choices: enforced integration or voluntary self-segregation, which also can operate as much as on intellectual and/or racial level, meaning that conflicts would be a lot more managable.




Anarchism doesn't acknowledge race, so it doesn't work unless you're in very tiny communities. Because of this Libertarianism and Anarchism will both lead to Totalitarianism since your White country will be flooded with mud and nothing will be left for you or your people.


Look at Detroit. Typical Republican/Libertarian response is that it died because of BIG GOVERNMENT:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hhJ_49leBw

Detroit is 85% Black. It's an African city. That's what happens when a White city turns mud.

[iOWNme]

Very few people want real freedom. The larger your group, the more likely a Statist(s) will take over. Freedom is an anomaly, not a norm.


'Very few' people are all it as ever taken to push humanity forward, the 'larger group' has always been the spineless jellyfish who follow the minority. The 'masses' dont matter when it comes to TRUTH.




Are the illegal immigrants flooding into the USA more likely to vote/want Socialism or Capitalism/Free Markets?

And if there were no 'Government' please tell me how these 'illegals' would be able to FORCE me to pay for anything for them? Kinda like the 'Evil Jews' you speak of. Without people believeing in 'Government' they have no 'legitimate' cover, they are exposed as the gang of criminals they are.




I agree with Zionism (the Dictionary definition,) because I believe the Jewish people have a right to a homeland of their own. I also believe Whites, Blacks, Mestizos, Asians and so on have a right to a homeland. Zionism has over time is just a fancy word for Jewish Supremacism, which I'm apposed to. Here's the actual definition in the dictionary:
Zi·on·ism

noun \ˈzī-ə-ˌni-zəm\ : political support for the creation and development of a Jewish homeland in Israel


There are no 'groups' of races, there are only INDIVIDUALS who are either doing right or doing wrong. A 'group' is a fictional concept, what exists in reality are individual people. Where they live, how many of them there are, what skin color they have or what religion they worship DOES NOT alter them from mortal individuals into anything else.




So why can't Jews have their own homeland? More power to them. Just stop parasitizing off of our people. If we had Nationalism they wouldnt be around to parasite on us, they'd have to parasite on themselves. :)


Because in order for you to 'designate' a specific area for 'Jews only' or for 'Mexicans only' you would have to FORCE non Jews and non Maxicans off of that land, and YOU nor any other mortal human being has the moral right to do that. Can you really not see and understand this? Because if you believe this, this logically implies that YOU should be FORCED off of your land, if there are enough 'Jews' or 'Mexicans' to do so. There is absolutely no moral principle behind this statement.





I'm a White male, and consider myself to be a National-Libertarian. Basically I'm a Nationalist who wants a limited government. The opposite of Nationalism is Globalism by the way.

Would you like a glass of dry water with this contradiction?

So you want a 'limited' gang of violent criminals to boss us around and steal our money. Is that really what you want? And WHO is going to pay for this small 'limited Government'?

There is no such thing as a 'limited Government' anymore than there is a such thing as a 'love rapist'. Its funny how we just keep going in circles. You make a statement, i point out the contradictions, you move on to another topic, you make a statement, i point out the contradictions, over and over again. At some point you would think you would admit yes there are contradictions but i just dont have the right answer in my head yet. But no, you cling to superstitions and dogmatic teachings that are EASILY proven false or contradictory.

'Nationalism' is Pavlovian Conditioning. 300 million innocent dead people are what is left in its path over the past 100 years.... Worshiping ones piece of dirt is silly. Worshiping self ownership, voluntaryism, the NAP and human morality is reasonable, sane and logical.

I used to 'believe' in a 'limited Government' also. The difference is when i was bashed over the head with Philosophy i chose to listen to my inner contradictions, and change my viewpoint. Some people can do it in a month, other people cling on to the false mythical deity of Statism forever.



When you compare it to every other nation that's existed in human history, yes. And I don't think anyone thinks slavery was a good idea. Now we are stuck with them.

Again, if the only principle you have is that it was 'better' than all of the others, then you have no principle at all. Being 'better' than all of the others isnt good enough for me, and it shouldnt be good enough for you either.


And as far as your data about how 'blacks' skin color means they are violent lets take a ponder at that statement.

'Government' instituted and condoned SLAVERY.
'Government' instituted and condoned Segregation.
'Government' instituted and condoned De-segregation
'Government' instituted and condoned the Welfare state.
'Government' instituted and condoned the War on Drugs.
'Government' instituted and condoned Affirmative action.


Shall i go on?

Forgive me if i cannot even comprehend or rationalize your stance about how 'Blacks' are some type of evil bad people.

[Shami-Amourae]

Shami, I dont get it, sorry. All immigration issues on this planet are orchestrated to spread conflicts and xenophobia as a distraction. if the USA hadnt endorsed slavery, many of the blacks would still be in africa. Doesnt make much sense to resolve the issue caused by rulers with another bunch of rulers.

However there only are 2 choices: enforced integration or voluntary self-segregation, which also can operate as much as on intellectual and/or racial level, meaning that conflicts would be a lot more managable.

You can do both. If I was king I'd pay Blacks $1 Million each to leave and renounce their citizenship. I'd have the military on the border with shoot-to-kill orders for any illegals crossing. Enforce all immigration laws. Things would clear up soon.

A more realistic solution is for Whites to go to a very White dense section of the US like the American Redoubt and declare independence from the US. Like the American Redoubt:
http://survivalblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/redoubt.jpg

Just say that we want to protect non-Whites from White privilege.
:p

[palani]

You can do both. If I was king I'd pay Blacks $1 Million each to leave and renounce their citizenship. I'd have the military on the border with shoot-to-kill orders for any illegals crossing. Enforce all immigration laws. Things would clear up soon.

Skin color is a poor choice to establish a nation on. International law has been established for relations between Christian countries. Private international law has been established for relations between all member nations of the U.N.

[Shami-Amourae]

'Very few' people are all it as ever taken to push humanity forward, the 'larger group' has always been the spineless jellyfish who follow the minority. The 'masses' dont matter when it comes to TRUTH.

Agreed.





And if there were no 'Government' please tell me how these 'illegals' would be able to FORCE me to pay for anything for them? Kinda like the 'Evil Jews' you speak of. Without people believeing in 'Government' they have no 'legitimate' cover, they are exposed as the gang of criminals they are.

Look at what happened to the Native Americans. The Native Americans had for the most part a healthy anarchist/Libertarian society. When an organized society of Statists moved in they were literally wiped out. Anarchism works great on an individual level but when you have a large outside threat it fails to protect the people from it. What I’m saying is it may be a superior system while it lasts, but don’t kid yourself thinking it will last since the nature of humanity shows it wont.
And I do see government as a gang of criminals. If you've known me on this forum I've been an anarchist for a number of years until recently. I know all the arguments since I've made them myself. You're not saying anything new I haven't argued myself. What changed is I found an important piece of information which changes everything. I found out the origins of “racism” and have come to terms with racial realism. To me racial denialists are like Christian Creationists. It's a total rejection of Evolution.






There are no 'groups' of races, there are only INDIVIDUALS who are either doing right or doing wrong. A 'group' is a fictional concept, what exists in reality are individual people. Where they live, how many of them there are, what skin color they have or what religion they worship DOES NOT alter them from mortal individuals into anything else.

Only Trotskyite indoctrinated White people believe that. People see race from the moment they are little. Little kids react differently to different races even when they aren't taught about race. Dogs know race. Dogs will freak out when a Black people walks up to them but be friendly when a White person is around. It's only taught that race is "wrong" to identify by Progressives. According to the Oxford English Dictionary the term “racist” was coined by Leon Trotsky in 1930 in an article (http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1930/hrr/ch01.htm) attacking the Slavophiles. You are supporting a Trotsky idea. You're trying to change human nature, which is very typical of a Progressive/Statist. That's why I call you a Progressive. Before Trotsky everyone understood race like we understand breeds of dogs. That wasn't because they were "ignorant", it was because it's common sense, and it takes conditioning to break that common sense (Cultural Marxism.)

People naturally separate based on race because that's how they are. Check out the 2010 US census broken down by race and you'll see what I mean:
Blue = White
Green = Black
Red = Asian
Orange = Hispanic
http://www.truthinourtime.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=153&stc=1&d=1377024846
Find out which parts of your town/city is "enriched":
The Racial Dot Map: One Dot Per Person for the Entire U.S. (http://anonym.to?http://anonym.to/?http://demographics.coopercenter.org/DotMap/index.html)


Notice how in major cities where Cultural Marxism/Leftism is strongest you see the most segregation based on race. Most of the White people there who will claim they are anti-racism and "don't see race" all live in White communities. Total hypocrites, but that's the norm. Everyone knows race exists except Progressive White people, and yet they still believe in race at the subconscious level as proven by the map above.






Because in order for you to 'designate' a specific area for 'Jews only' or for 'Mexicans only' you would have to FORCE non Jews and non Maxicans off of that land, and YOU nor any other mortal human being has the moral right to do that. Can you really not see and understand this? Because if you believe this, this logically implies that YOU should be FORCED off of your land, if there are enough 'Jews' or 'Mexicans' to do so. There is absolutely no moral principle behind this statement.

I don't believe in 100% racial purity. That's nearly impossible to achieve and simply wrong since it would require force to even remotely achieve. The US has been historically 90% White so I think that's an ideal goal. The region where I live is 90% White RIGHT NOW and would be a perfect place for a new country based on American principles (Jefferson/Washington, not Bush/Obama.) You can do it by establishing nations or even city-states where there are existing racial demographics favorable to what kind of society you want. Rounding up people based on race is virtually impossible but there are simple ways to "fix" things based on voluntary means like bribery and enforcing immigration laws.

As an anarchist are you happy there is no border between the US and Mexico anymore?





Would you like a glass of dry water with this contradiction?

Nationalism is simply the opposite of Globalism. It has NOTHING to do with government. There are actually National-Anarchists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National-Anarchism). If you are an Anarchists you should already know this.



So you want a 'limited' gang of violent criminals to boss us around and steal our money. Is that really what you want? And WHO is going to pay for this small 'limited Government'?

I know the age old debate of Anarchism versus Libertarianism. Anarchism is obviously the most ideal system. The problem is it just doesn't work since the freedom only exists through eternal vigilance. You can maintain an anarchist society for only so long, but I believe a Libertarian society can exist for longer since at least it's a semi-empty protective shell against Statism. I would LOVE to live in an the ideal Anarchist society as it's written down on paper, but the problem is it's only a idea on paper. It's simply not a realistic outcome.

In places like Somalia there is "Anarchy" but warlords have filled the gaps of government, and they are de-facto government since they use the initiation of force to get what they want and to "protect" their people for a "fee". You simply can't get away from Statism. If you can find a realistic way then do it and show us the way. Otherwise you're just an armchair revolutionary like the rest of us.

The other major problem I see with Anarchy is automation and the job/Capitalism paradigm collapsing since of that. Billions of unemployed starving people won't put up with Anarchy.



There is no such thing as a 'limited Government' anymore than there is a such thing as a 'love rapist'. Its funny how we just keep going in circles. You make a statement, i point out the contradictions, you move on to another topic, you make a statement, i point out the contradictions, over and over again. At some point you would think you would admit yes there are contradictions but i just dont have the right answer in my head yet. But no, you cling to superstitions and dogmatic teachings that are EASILY proven false or contradictory.

There's no such thing as Anarchism since it doesn't exist. It's just an idea on paper. There are limited governments, so I think that's a more realistic goal. This may sound weird, but the only real Anarchism that exists in the world is the Internet. I do think technology can make Anarchism from an idea on paper to a reality so if you really do want Anarchy (which I do) then focus on doing it through technology/the Internet.



'Nationalism' is Pavlovian Conditioning. 300 million innocent dead people are what is left in its path over the past 100 years.... Worshiping ones piece of dirt is silly. Worshiping self ownership, voluntaryism, the NAP and human morality is reasonable, sane and logical.

Again don't confuse Statism with Nationalism. Nationalism is just the opposite of Globalism. You can have a Nationalism Dictatorship or National-Anarchism.



I used to 'believe' in a 'limited Government' also. The difference is when i was bashed over the head with Philosophy i chose to listen to my inner contradictions, and change my viewpoint. Some people can do it in a month, other people cling on to the false mythical deity of Statism forever.

I went from Socialist to Libertarian to Anarchist to National-Libertarian. This is a natural progression. I lot of the people I know who believe what I believe are all former Anarchists. I think you may agree with me one day. It's the natural progression as you deprogram from Progressivism/Statism. Our ideas are always changing too. I mean I doubt you believed what you do now 5 years ago. 5 years from now can you seriously say you'll believe the same things you believe today? We evolve as we learn new things.




Again, if the only principle you have is that it was 'better' than all of the others, then you have no principle at all. Being 'better' than all of the others isnt good enough for me, and it shouldnt be good enough for you either.

Blacks should have been left in Africa to live as bushmen. That is their natural state that they evolved to be. When they were in that state Blacks were not starving in Africa like they were today. Blacks are good at being Blacks. They belong in their own homeland with their own people where they can be themselves. Taking them out of their natural environment is like having wild Lion as a house pet and wondering why it's eating your kids.

I am NOT a White Supremacist. Honestly I think Whites are on of the most inferior races. Why? Because we allow other groups to take advantage of us at our own detriment and it's going to make us non-existent over time. Who is superior, the T-Rex or the Cockroach? The T-Rex may have been big and mighty but died out millions of years ago. The Cockroach still survives strong till this day. Brown people breed like rabbits while idiot White people don't, and think it's a smart idea to bring them into their nations. That only spells the externmination of the White race.

[Shami-Amourae]

Skin color is a poor choice to establish a nation on. International law has been established for relations between Christian countries. Private international law has been established for relations between all member nations of the U.N.

Japan has done it successfully:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qBUQTcHPQg

They don't apologise for it and so no one calls them EVIL RACISTS since of it (and gets any traction.)

[Horn]

Skin color is a poor choice to establish a nation on.

Who said anything about establishing a nation, palani?

They're looking for a place to go and not establish a free nation. Shami thinking that the rest of the world will allow his all white nation to trade or move about freely with theirs will be upset, and iownme won't have a place to own where he can call home.

[Shami-Amourae]

Shami thinking that the rest of the world will allow his all white nation to trade or move about freely with theirs will be upset

Read my posts. I don't want an ALL White nation. I want a mostly White nation like America was for most of it's existence. Call it American Nationalism if you want. There are Blacks, Mestizos, and Asians who believe in traditional Americanism and those are the kinds of people I want to be around regardless of race, it's just they are an extreme minority and considered traitors by their own people (Uncle Toms.) I'm not a purist, and never will be. Japanese is mostly Japanese. They aren't considered "racist". Why the double standard? Honestly if all the Third World immigration to the US would fucking stop I'd be happy. It's destroying everything that was built in this country over generations.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPjzfGChGlE

A pre-existing region in the US that's already mostly White could split off if/when the US splits apart. Places like California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas are already lost.

When millions of White people came to the Americas and displaced Native Americans people consider that wrong, but when the same happens in reverse it's considered righteous. WTF is that?

[palani]

Who said anything about establishing a nation

Perhaps tribe would more appropriate? The meaning is the same as nation.

[Horn]

Can You Speak Japanese? (video) (http://www.corbettreport.com/can-you-speak-japanese-video/)
You're already in a mostly white nation, Shami.