B. U. G. S.

My apologies if this thread has been done already. If so I request this post could be merged with it.

I was thinking we could make a list of common arguments we receive in response to the mantra, and arguments we could make in response to those. Here is my list so far. Feel free to add more or make better responses to the ones I posted than the ones I already made.

1. “I’m not anti-white, I want ALL people to be blended into one race”

Regardless of what you want, this is happening in all white countries and only white countries (this seems like a somewhat weak response, does anyone have any better response?)

2. “There is no proof of an organized movement to commit genocide against white people”

Link to Sarkozy’s speech, Tim Wise and Noam Ignatiev’s words, etc

3. “Genocide must be violent to be genocide”

Not true. The UN defines genocide as any attempt to wipe a people out, whether through violence or forced assimilation. The Australian attempt to wipe out the aborigines through forced assimilation was considered an attempt at genocide. The Japanese attempt to wipe out the Ainu through forced assimilation was much more successful. Given the climate in the educational system today, and the way in which mixed race children in many countries will be given preferential treatment over whites for university admissions and jobs by law when they grow up, I would say that “forced assimilation” is very much taking place.

4. “Eastern Europe is still very white”

For now. Let’s see what happens when they reach first world economic status. Also, even if Eastern europe survives, it will still be the genocide of all western european peoples and cultures.

5. “White people are evil and deserve to be wiped out”

Because the Mongols, Turks, Arabs, Muslims who conquested India, Japanese, Chinese, Zulus etc. never committed genocide or slavery or subjugation against other races?

And thanks for admitting that you actually do support genocide.

6. “There is plenty of diversity in non-white countries”

Yes, there are small ethnic minorities in countries like China and Vietnam. But do these minorities pose any significant threat to the dominant culture and ethnicity? Are these minorities really all that foreign, compared to the dominant ethnicity? These “minorities” are more like Irish people living in England than Africans or Bangladeshis living in England. In most cases they are very racially and culturally similar to the dominant ethnicity. Also in these countries there isn’t a trend of immigration from literally every corner of the globe that threatens to make the dominant ethnicity a minority in their own nation. Malaysia is the closest that any non-white country comes to fitting this pattern, but the Malay (indigenous) population are privileged by law over the minorities, and their population is growing faster than any other ethnicity, so while they are around 50% now, they will be more in a few decades. In western countries, the trend is the reverse of that. The dominant ethnicity shrinks while the minorities grow. The only real exception to this rule is Singapore, which is a city state and barely even counts as a real country anyway.

7. “Whites have too much land relative to their population/whites stole North America, Australia etc from the natives”

Well then why are countries like Holland and England and Belgium which are already over crowded being flooded with immigrants from every corner of the globe? Stop pretending this is about equality of land ownership. White genocide is happening not only in new world white countries but for Europe too. It’s not like we get to keep some small corner of the globe, like, say, Europe. This is even happening in rural France. What they are calling for now is for whites to give up ALL of their land to diversity, both conquered lands and native indigenous homelands alike.

8. “Nobody is forcing whites to intermarry or abandon or dislike their own culture”

Nobody’s technically forcing anything at the point of a gun. But Sarkozy flat out told the white population of France that they must embrace “metissage”. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XM8A9io7MnA The translation for the word “metissage” means race mixing. That is why the part first nations/part white people in Canada are called the “Metis”. “Metis” is the prefix of the word “metissage”. It is similar to the spanish word “Mestizo” for mixed amerindian/Spanish people of Latin America. Also here http://topconservativenews.com/2011/03/obama-administration-californias-whitest-must-be-forcibly-integrated/ in the first video here, it flat out shows that the officials of Marin County, California are trying to attract more non whites into the county to make it less white. That is literally what it says. CNN even called the video “Whitest county looking for non-whites”.

Anyway, what I’ve experienced in school and university has definitely sent the message that I should dislike my own culture and be ashamed of being white. It seems like the government is definitely pushing these things on us, even if they technically aren’t forcing us at the barrel of a gun. Also, there is the incentive of having a mixed race non-white child to get preferential treatment in university admissions (in USA and Brazil) or in getting a government job (in Canada).

9. “You don’t want to give people the freedom to mix with other races”

Sure, people should have that freedom somewhere in the world. But why must it be in white countries, in EVERY white country, and ONLY in white countries? These are conditions calculated to bring out the genocide of the white race.

If you want to make the argument that certain limited parts of the world should be turned into a mixed race region where everyone can intermarry and interbreed, then fine, but to make the argument that this must happen in all white countries and only white countries is genocide.

10. “What about the Native Americans/Aboriginal Australians/Maoris? Shouldn’t they get a homeland too? If it’s white genocide to deny whites a homeland, why are you denying them one?”

I’m not. I think we should enter into negotiations with these groups about giving them a homeland. Realistically we can’t give them back all of what was once their land, just like us whites can’t realistically expect Turkey to give back the land they stole from us. But I think a comrpomise can be made. You on the other hand seem unwilling to compromise on the issue of forcing whites into conditions that will lead them to being bred out and reduced to a small minority in ALL white countries. Also, the natives may have smaller numbers than us, but they have GROWING numbers and they are not subjected to humiliating, dehumanizing propaganda designed to make them hate their own race.

11. “There is no such thing as race. We are all the human race/All humans are 99% related by DNA (or whatever)”

Funny how you aren’t telling that to Japan or Israel. Nobody is using that as an argument to put an end to native reserves and to allow Native Americans to be blended out of existence and stop any effort by Native Americans to preserve themselves as a culture and a race. This argument is only used against white people.

I don’t care what statistics you can pull out about how the average white person is 2% black or Arab, or how the entire human race is 98% related in DNA (we are also over 90% related to other species that are totally different from humans, I believe pretty close to 98% with apes). These statistics are meaningless to the question of whether a large group of people that self identifies as one culture has the right to exist.

12. “White culture will still survive even if whites do not. The people who inherit their lands will inherit their culture”

Would you use that logic to justify conditions that would lead to native americans being bred out of existence? As long as us whites continue doing pow-wows every now and then to commemorate the native americans then replacing them and assimilating them out of existence would be okay?

Sounds pretty messed up when the shoe is on the other foot, doesn’t it?

13. “White people want to go extinct. This isn’t genocide, this is suicide”

Firstly, not true. http://www.ipsos-mori.com/DownloadPublication/1634_sri-perceptions-and-reality-immigration-report-2013.pdf From the results here, the majority of people in the UK and many other European nations are clearly anti-immigration in the majority.

There is also plenty of brainwashing here. Sweden is an exceptionally brainwashed country, but all western countries are undergoing the same process. When the media, educational system and government all beat people over the head at a young age telling them they must want diversity, shutting out and demonizing all contrary viewpoints, these people aren’t getting the full picture or being told the full truth.

When we start allowing people to be exposed to contrary viewpoints then we will see how the public opinion is affected.

How is it simply “suicide” when the media and government and educational system aggressively attack and suppress any efforts by whites to mobilize in support of preserving their race? Suicide implies something that someone is doing to themselves. At very least it would be “assisted suicide” since the government, media and educational system are clearly egging it on. But I would go so far as to call it akin to preventing a man dying of thirst from drinking a glass of water.

Also even if a majority of a particular nationality want their own genocide, wouldn’t the minority who don’t still have a right to preserve themselves in some form?

14. America/Australia/New Zealand/Canada/Argentina etc isn’t a white country

Whether you want to debate if specific countries aren’t white countries is irrelevant. You deny whites the right to self preservation in ALL white countries. Even Sweden or Holland or France or Denmark cannot remain a white country according to modern day politically correct ideology. So stop deflecting by questioning whether specific countries have the right to remain white countries when your ideology opposes the right of ALL white countries to remain white countries.

15. You’ll be dead in 100 years so why do you care? You won’t live to see the virtual extinction of the white race or whites becoming a minority everywhere, so why does it matter to you?

First off, that implies that I am selfish and only care for myself and not future generations. What about our children, and their children? Secondly, if current trends keep up, I will definitely see whites reduced to a minority in the USA, Canada, New Zealand, the UK, France and Sweden within my lifetime.

16. Deporting non whites would be impractical and cruel. It isn’t doable

And extinguishing the white race isn’t cruel? Realistically, it is the lesser of two evils. Some hurt feelings and people having to move don’t supersede the annihilation of an entire race in terms of which is the greater atrocity. And as for whether it’s doable, look at how Algeria expelled the French back in the 1960s. It is doable.

17. It’s not about race, it’s about culture
You’re arguing whites lack their own culture, and that their culture is interchangable with that of non-whites, therefore it is okay to breed us out of existence and replace us with non-whites. Would whites doing pow wows justify the extermination of native americans? regardless of whether the white culture would survive in any form, it would still be genocide. If whites bred out all the native americans but continued to do pow-wows to carry on the natives’ cultural legacy, it wouldn’t change the fact that the natives had a genocide committed against them.

18. there is no such thing as race
When you say you don’t see race, that argument could be used to extinguish anyone. You could put an end to native reservations and say “race doesn’t matter, interbreed with everyone else now”.

You don’t simply become part of a nation by moving there. Most immigrants still are loyal to their own race and their own culture.
Would you tell Native Americans they have no right to preserve themselves because there is no such thing as race? Would you tell Tibetans that?

19. “Race doesn’t matter”

It does matter to the elites committing white genocide otherwise they wouldn’t be flooding all white countries and only white countries with foreigners designed to breed them out of existence. The argument “race doesn’t matter” could be used to justify genocide against any race. Would you tell a Japanese person race doesn’t matter in order to blend them out of existence? Or an African?

20. “there has always been race mixing”

And right now it is being used by the elite as a demographic time bomb to wipe out the white race. Why do you deny whites the right to self preservation? There has also been races fighting for their preservation since time immemorial

21. “Non white countries are only poor because of whites. They have a right to move here and get rich and reclaim what we stole from them”

Japan devastated a good portion of east asia, turkey devastated a good portion of Europe and the middle east and north Africa, but no one is suggesting the Japanese or turks be blended out of existence to atone for their sins. If atonement for colonialism is the issue, how is wiping out an entire race in any way a fair punishment for a few centuries of plundering a limited amount of natural resources?

22. “Your ideology is white supremacy, which has killed millions in the past (holocaust, kkk)”

We aren’t claiming we are better, we are claiming we have a right to exist. Japanese supremacists killed 5 million in east Asia during ww2 but no one calls them racist for preserving their culture and race today. Turkey killed millions of Armenians and Greeks but no one denies them their right to exist either.