Originally Posted by meawhiterabbit

Typical response of an anti-white. All insults but no debate at all.

Why are you such self hating.

A live one

people who don't espouse racial hatred behind a cloak of ethnic-protectionism have read all your little points time and time again under different guises.

The debate is done to death.
And I'm not self-hating, not by a long shot. I also like coloured women. Maybe I'll marry one.

Originally Posted by SeamusNapoleon

A live one



The debate is done to death.
And I'm not self-hating, not by a long shot. I also like coloured women. Maybe I'll marry one.

You exhibit the classic signs of a self hating anti-white but hey you will not admit to that.

With regard to you liking coloured women-I don't care if you also think horses are purple.

I notice you didn't answer my question...........

While we are waiting.....

Whites are overrepresented in university” You are an anti-racist.
“Asians are overrepresented in university” You are a racist.

“I want more non-white people in this country” You are an anti-racist.
“I want more white people in this country” You are a racist.

“I'm going to set up a program for preferential hiring of non-whites” You are an anti-racist.
“I'm going to set up a program for preferential hiring of whites” You are a racist.

“White people are moving to a non-white country” Colonialism!
“Non-whites people are moving to a white country” Diversity!

“I'm starting a scholarship for non-whites only” You are an anti-racist.
“I'm starting a scholarship for whites only” You are a racist.

“Whites are changing the culture of a non-white country” Imperialism!
“Non-whites are changing the culture of a white country” Diversity!

Whenever someone say “I want more diversity” they really mean “I want less white people.” “Diversity” is a code word for white ethnic cleansing.

So perhaps now that you understand the mind of an “anti-racist” you can see for yourself that,

They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.

Anti-Racist is a code word for anti-white.

Originally Posted by meawhiterabbit

Typical response of an anti-white. All insults but no debate at all.

Why are you such self hating.

The overarching goal of the “open borders” movement is to flood millions of non-Whites into all traditionally White nations. Make no mistake – this is not mere coincidence. It is White genocide by design, worldwide in application. The United States, Great Britain, France, Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Australia: White people founded and populated these nations. All of these nations operated under the implicit mandate, if not explicit by law, that they existed as White nations for the posterity of the White founding stock. All of these nations had overwhelmingly White populations for the preponderance of their national history. Now, in the beginning of the twenty-first century, all of these traditionally White nations face demographic upheavals through massive non-White immigration. The White populations of these countries are slated to become minority populations in just a few generations.

Would you be pro an immigration policy for African countries and ONLY African countries that saw them flooded with Non Africans? Lets imagine these Africans had such a small birthrate, they were been out bred 4:1 by the non Africans. Would you agree with this? Would you not think something was untoward?

The general style of your posts are very like those from Stormfront. Is this a coincidence? You know there are a lot of people, myself included, who think that there is way too much immigration into First world countries but you strike me as one of the stormfront types that like to add conspiracy theories to the whole thing that usually involve the Jews, ie the Jews are flooding Europe with Africans and Asians, the holocaust never happened, capitalism and/or communism is a great Jewish plot. And then of course there’s the archaic Jim Crow era language.

Originally Posted by Brenny

The general style of your posts are very like those from Stormfront. Is this a coincidence? You know there are a lot of people, myself included, who think that there is way too much immigration into First world countries but you strike me as one of the stormfront types that like to add conspiracy theories to the whole thing that usually involve the Jews, ie the Jews are flooding Europe with Africans and Asians, the holocaust never happened, capitalism and/or communism is a great Jewish plot. And then of course there’s the archaic Jim Crow era language.

Lets not sidetrack the discussion please with your smears.

While you are here perhaps you can also answer my question

Would you be pro an immigration policy for African countries and ONLY African countries that saw them flooded with Non Africans? Lets imagine these Africans had such a small birthrate, they were been out bred 4:1 by the non Africans. Would you agree with this? Would you not think something was untoward?

Originally Posted by meawhiterabbit

Typical response of an anti-white. All insults but no debate at all.

Why are you such self hating.

The overarching goal of the “open borders” movement is to flood millions of non-Whites into all traditionally White nations. Make no mistake – this is not mere coincidence. It is White genocide by design, worldwide in application. The United States, Great Britain, France, Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Australia: White people founded and populated these nations. All of these nations operated under the implicit mandate, if not explicit by law, that they existed as White nations for the posterity of the White founding stock. All of these nations had overwhelmingly White populations for the preponderance of their national history. Now, in the beginning of the twenty-first century, all of these traditionally White nations face demographic upheavals through massive non-White immigration. The White populations of these countries are slated to become minority populations in just a few generations.

Would you be pro an immigration policy for African countries and ONLY African countries that saw them flooded with Non Africans? Lets imagine these Africans had such a small birthrate, they were been out bred 4:1 by the non Africans. Would you agree with this? Would you not think something was untoward?

Thank you for proving JS Mill's point that the best way to combat vile ideas is to expose them to public ridicule.

Originally Posted by Brenny

but you strike me as one of the stormfront types that like to add conspiracy theories to the whole thing that usually involve the Jews, ie the Jews are flooding Europe with Africans and Asians, the holocaust never happened, capitalism and/or communism is a great Jewish plot. And then of course there’s the archaic Jim Crow era language.

You strike me as the kind of person who hates poor people and wants them all sterilised. I've seen your sort before.

Ridicule? No its just a bunch of Marxist anti-whites dodging the questions.......nice use of the word "vile" by the way makes a change from calling someone with non leftist commie ideas a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionsjews

Lets get all your tactics out in the open first so then we can have a sensible debate.


Attacking the messenger (distraction) - The purpose of these insults is to distract observers from the topic being discussed and to try to prevent them from thinking critically about it or to try to cause them to lose interest in it.

Insulting intelligence or ideas (deflection) - This can be either an attack on the messenger or an attack on the ideas themselves by trying to make them appear stupid, unpopular, foolish, crazy, insane, etc. The purpose of these insults and belittling comments is to make observers think that the topic is unworthy of their consideration or investigation.

Negative association (deflection) - This tactic attempts to link one topic to another unrelated topic that sounds crazy or stupid to most people, like aliens, UFOs, shape-shifting lizards, etc. The idea is to get the observer to think that people who believe in one topic also believe in another crazy topic and to conclude that the topic in question is unworthy of their consideration or investigation.

Divide and conquer (distraction) - With this tactic they pretend to be one of their enemies, and then they proceed to say hateful, disgusting or inflammatory things to get people to attack the group they are pretending to be. They also do this to make their enemies look evil or stupid in the eyes of the other group.

[
Role modeling (deception) - With this tactic they try to get the observer to think that reacting a certain way is normal or desirable. For example they will pretend not to be interested in a topic, that the topic or activity isn't worth their time, that they are afraid to do something or concerned about the consequences. In short, they will pretend to react how they want the observer to react to try to ensure that the observer does not take the appropriate action or react in the appropriate manner.

Behavioral projection (deception) - With this tactic they project their own behavior onto the person they are attacking or onto another group that they wish for the observers to attack. For example they may claim (while posing as a White Nationalist behind an anonymous account) that Muslims would infiltrate a White Nationalist website and pose as White Nationalists to blame Jews for things they didn't do, when in fact it is the Jews that have infiltrated the White Nationalist website and are posing as White Nationalists to blame Muslims for things they didn't do (like 9/11) and to encourage White Nationalists to hate Muslims so that White Nationalists will never think to unite with Muslims to defeat the Jews.

Reverse projection / playing the victim (deception) - With this tactic they project a horrible circumstance onto themselves while actually creating a horrible circumstance for their victim. By pretending to be the victim of a horrible situation while attacking their victim they either catch their victim off guard so the victim doesn't realize they are being attacked until it's too late, or they catch observers off guard so observers don't realize who the real attacker is and defend the real victim.

So with the cards now on the table......

Would you be pro an immigration policy for African countries and ONLY African countries that saw them flooded with Non Africans? Lets imagine these Africans had such a small birthrate, they were been out bred 4:1 by the non Africans. Would you agree with this? Would you not think something was untoward?

Originally Posted by meawhiterabbit

No i think African countries are great just as they are and should remain African. I wouldn't want to make it whiter any more than i would like to make Japan more Arab. I am all for diversity-Its fantastic. I believe all the races have a right to have a home where they are the majority and will continue to be a majority. Anti-whites on the other hand do not share my point of view. Let me explain.

We have all heard politicians talk about diversity, tolerance, understanding, multiculturalism, immigration, integration, assimilation, the melting pot and so on but its only ever in regards to ONLY white countries and ALL white countries

Anti-racist are in reality simply anti-white. Their goal and their mentality can best be described by the Harvard professor Noel Ignatiev in his article: “Abolish the White Race.”

“The goal of abolishing the white race is on its face so desirable that some may find it hard to believe that it could incur any opposition other than from committed white supremacists.”

Or in this video

‪Racist comment by Barbara Spectre in Sweden head of PAIDEIA‬‏ - YouTube


This goal of abolishing the white race can be divided up into four basic stages:

1. The demonization of whites. Another term for this is what is often referred to as “White Guilt.”
2. Third world immigration into all white countries and only into white countries.
3. Forced integration as the first step towards assimilation. Assimilation is not directly forced but everybody who opposes it is condemned for being racist.
4. Anyone who speaks out against any part of the process of White genocide will be denounced as a ‘Racist’, ‘White Supremacist’ or a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.

This is only happening in all white countries and ONLY white countries. It is genocide of our race, the white race.

But did the White races not come fom Africa at a time when we had much darker Skin?

I’m assuming this is directed at me.

Originally Posted by meawhiterabbit

Ridicule? No its just a bunch of Marxist anti-whites dodging the questions.......nice use of the word "vile" by the way makes a change from calling someone with non leftist commie ideas a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionsjews

Originally Posted by meawhiterabbit

Lets get all your tactics out in the open first so then we can have a sensible debate.

Whatever floats your boat. I’m not interested in copypasta, personally.

Originally Posted by meawhiterabbit

Would you be pro an immigration policy for African countries and ONLY African countries that saw them flooded with Non Africans? Lets imagine these Africans had such a small birthrate, they were been out bred 4:1 by the non Africans. Would you agree with this? Would you not think something was untoward?

I would want to know why such a policy applied to only African countries, and I would question the use of question-begging terms like “flooded”.

Originally Posted by Mercurial

I’m assuming this is directed at me.






Whatever floats your boat. I’m not interested in copypasta, personally.

Why does the source matter. It exposes your smear tactics and evens the playing field.




I would want to know why such a policy applied to only African countries, and I would question the use of question-begging terms like “flooded”.

As you know its Hypothetical. I'll play along though. Simply substitute Japan/China/Saudi Arabia/Peru/Guyana/Korea (north or south your choice)/Jamaica/Iran/Egypt/......any non white country you want for Africa. Would you object to these countries being flooded (mass immigration with little or no control measures) buy whites?