[POLL] Your views on race and migration.

[Sandalwood Peak]

A lot of people seem to disapprove of mass migration but I often see a lack of effort in people to align with a particular position.

Sometimes it becomes so ambiguous that I'm not sure if people are protesting rising crime or actual migration.

So let's try to do a little consensus building here.

 

[thinkreadwritecode]

I choose none of the above because weaponized immigration is the problem we are currently facing. It doesn't matter how quaint I might feel about migrants or immigrants, legal or illegal, because it is obvious any reasonable system is being ignored in order to bring the country down.

 

[Blade Runner]

The best way for things, whatever that means, is for there to be a people from a land with a common heritage and culture. I think there should be identity of nations that is distinct and proper diplomacy. If trade and even some migration is desired, that is also possible, but each place has to have a majority culture that is not questioned and is maintained politically and by force. That's the issue.

 

[Thomas More]

None of the poll choices really suit me. I believe it would have been ideal if the US had never increased immigration starting in the 1960s, and it still had the racial and cultural balance it had then. Same for the European countries, although I think they started later on the high rate of immigration.

However, we can't go back in time. We're stuck with the situation as it is now. Should we round up all the nonwhites and kill them? Maybe not kill them, but put them in concentration camps, then load them onto ships and just dump them on the shores where they or their parents once lived? Maybe not just dump them on the shore, but force arrangements with the governments of those places, to take in millions of forced immigrants (who at least are ethnically similar to the current populations in those places)?

None of these options is really practical, and it may be argued that some are immoral and unchristian. So, what can actually be done? It's hard to say. The pro-immigration forces have really done a number on Western society.

I'd say that immigration should be cut nearly to zero (legal and illegal), and all welfare and employer incentives should be in the direction of encouraging them to go back to where they came from. In many cases, it's not practical for them to go back, so while this kind of policy would reduce the alien presence in Western societies, it wouldn't eliminate it. I don't see any way of avoiding some accommodation with these people living in our society.

As far as accommodation goes, I would first of all want the Western Governments to explicitly recognize our Christian heritage. They may allow freedom of other religions, but they should say that public and personal expressions of Christian beliefs and values are protected. Secondly, there should be aggressive law and order, with anyone who commits a crime being locked up for a long time, or executed. In the case of immigrants who commit crimes, I would lock them up for their full sentence, or execute them as applicable, and only after their sentence would I forcibly repatriate them to their place of origin.

 

[Sandalwood Peak]

None of the poll choices really suit me. I believe it would have been ideal if the US had never increased immigration starting in the 1960s, and it still had the racial and cultural balance it had then.

Let's play Devil's advocate....

The liberal argumentation here would be:

• You're advocating for a european-racial hegemony over the US.
• You want minorities as second class citizens, including religious minorities.
• What you're saying is literal racism.
• You miss Jim Crow America.

You wish America stayed white, essentially.

You want to bar people from coming in. On what grounds? Racial or just too many people here already?

You want zero tolerance policing. Does this apply to visible minorities, first generation Americans, non-citizens or everyone?

The things you wish for contradict the "equal under the law" principle and "minority rights" are nonexistent in your position.

Are you willing to advocate for this publically?

 

[Shaquilleoatmeal]

You want minorities as second class citizens, including religious minorities.

The Bible isn’t against Christian’s being the majority population.

 

[GoodShepherd]

Because of the times we are living in immigration should be for people who share the same faith or a very similar compatible faith, the race should be very similar too and so should the culture, for example, since USA is an English colony there shouldnt be too much of a problem for immigrants of those countries coming in if they fit the criteria, "if" immigrants from other races and cultures do get imported they should be the cream of the crop or very wealthy, I think USA has already done this, its called a brain drain where they take the best from other nations this was wise.

The way I see immigration currently happening all over the world its a disaster.

 

[Shaquilleoatmeal]

What you're saying is literal racism.

I was gonna get to this point in another thread. Will do here.

If someone chooses dating partners based on race, is it racist?

The answer is that it is. The definition of racism is discrimination, which is inherent in dating. People don’t like to admit this, but by definition it’s true. Because deep down people believe racism by default is wrong. I disagree. I think racism can be justified. Including immigration policies. Arguing against such policies as “racist” is a lazy cop out.

 

[mountainaire]

I was gonna get to this point in another thread. Will do here.

If someone chooses dating partners based on race, is it racist?

The answer is that it is. People don’t like to admit this, but by definition it’s true. Because deep down people believe racism by default is wrong. I disagree. I think racism can be justified. Including immigration policies. Arguing against such policies as “racist” is a lazy cop out.

The easy way to defeat the liberal cries of racism is to ask them if they think it would be ok to flood a poor African nation with millions upon millions of white people, giving them the red carpet treatment, free stuff, and allowing them to change the culture and demographics of that country.

Just take what's happening in the west and turn it back around on their pet minorities and it somehow becomes wrong.

 

[God's lonely asperger]

I don't even care about politics anymore I'm just racist now.

 

[Sandalwood Peak]

I was gonna get to this point in another thread. Will do here.

If someone chooses dating partners based on race, is it racist?

The answer is that it is. The definition of racism is discrimination, which is inherent in dating. People don’t like to admit this, but by definition it’s true. Because deep down people believe racism by default is wrong. I disagree. I think racism can be justified. Including immigration policies. Arguing against such policies as “racist” is a lazy cop out.

That's why the default answer is "I'm open to dating everyone". That's a freebie too, inconsequential, demographics concerns actual "human rights" which is the golden goose of modern leftism. "Human rights" is the final boss sort of speak for any current right leaning movement.

This is something I've been thinking about for a while and just how wide that gap is between conservative closed door sentiments and public opinion.

First we should be able to argue our political positions. I can say "white sharia" all day on the internet but can't have that conversation out in public, given how diametrically opposed it is to the status quo. You risk being bullied and/or laughted out of a room.

This is why extreme leftism or "far right" talking points are so common with young people online. They don't actually comprehend how these ideas translate towards application and the amount of pushback they would receive. This is why you listen to Anglin actually speak and he tones it down hard, I'm guessing due to experience.

Speaking of Anglin, he makes a salient point.

Anglin says the second there's a kid getting ripped away from his mother's arms the deportations will stop.

I think there's merit to the liberal argument of covert prejudice in conservative philosophy. I think it's part of necessity. Some of the positions we hold require plausible deniability to not enflame passions so both sides kind of accept it remaining unspoken.

As an example. Lets say you got some ambigious brown man. He's just happy to be here. He's not going to understand why he's getting deported, he's not going to understand what the white genocide is, etc. Frankly he might not even have the IQ for it, like many don't for the JQ. He's going to feel he's being treated unfairly.

It's not just that liberals might call us racist, there's a bunch of people that suckled on the liberal koolaid from birth and literally have no idea what we believe and why. To them it's just hatred. It's doubtful it can be explained. Some things will require you closing your eyes and powering through.

 

[Thomas More]

Let's play Devil's advocate....

The liberal argumentation here would be:

• You're advocating for a european-racial hegemony over the US.
• You want minorities as second class citizens, including religious minorities.
• What you're saying is literal racism.
• You miss Jim Crow America.

You wish America stayed white, essentially.

You want to bar people from coming in. On what grounds? Racial or just too many people here already?

You want zero tolerance policing. Does this apply to visible minorities, first generation Americans, non-citizens or everyone?

The things you wish for contradict the "equal under the law" principle and "minority rights" are nonexistent in your position.

Are you willing to advocate for this publically?

Yes, by wishing things had stayed the way they were a lifetime ago, I am a racist by liberal standards. Patriarchal, homophobic, sexist... You name it!

However, when thinking about public policy today, I don't see that we can make it like it was. My policy prescriptions are doable now, although they might be outside of what's possible politically. I think some of them are possible.

I want to bar people coming in because we've already had too much immigration and it has greatly undermined and harmed society. I would block all immigration, red, yellow, black, or white. It is known that immigration was blocked in the 1920s, and the US society became much more homogeneous over the next two generations. We need to do that again.

As far as policing, I would apply the law equally to all races. In practice, this will mean a lot more minorities going to jail than white people, because a lot more crimes are committed by minorities. I think the pendulum is ready to start swinging towards tougher, color-blind law enforcement with long jail sentences, similar to what happened in the 1980s. Once enough criminals are locked up, the crime rate will drop and things will be better in many ways.

As for the rights of Christians, these should already be protected under the constitution, but the current left has interpreted the separation of church and state to mean the state has to be anti-Christian, but open minded about all other religions. I would fix this. Communities should be able to have nativity scenes on the courthouse square and play Christian Christmas songs downtown during the season. States should be able to pass laws based on Biblical values. I would say that individuals and companies should have the right to discriminate against non-Christians for various job positions. It's currently legal for other religions to discriminate against Christians, so I would just make this even across the board.

I am willing to publicly say these things.

 

[RedLagoon]

You don't have to go belly up being a Christian, so none of the above.

The anti Christians are using mass immigration from places that have never sorted themselves out to sort us out... so that's all you need to know as we're not receiving any rocket scientists.

 

[Blade Runner]

I think the only way any of this happens is via breakaway regions or new republics, by the way.

 

[MusicForThePiano]

It depends on what kind of "immigration" this is. Is a White American, who is apparently a descendant of Europe, moving to their home soil? Is a European moving to America, or Australia? These are valid and should be encouraged depending on the needs and the struggles of the population of each. If the Chinese have a colony in Africa, and a Chinaman in the homeland wants to go make big money for big boss over there make lots happy success, then good on him. People go to their familiars, and anything else is cosmopolitan on behalf of Europeans and their American and Oceanic descendants, or parasitism on behalf of the non-Whites, who quite frankly have nothing but a history of this behavior.

At this point, anti-racism is suicide for all who espouse it. There may be a time to consider outliers in a future society when proper non-jewish order is established, but until then, tribalism is nature's corrective course for a century plus of failed humanism, and it is growing by the day, stronger than DEI, trannyism, faggotry, and neoliberal-marxism or anything else that is not derived from nature and natural law.

 

[KulturedKaveman]

There are lots of reasons for people wanting to come to America. Family, work opportunities, like the culture, etc. but this doesn’t change the facts on the ground. America has a history and it is a European Protestant nation. It was founded by European Protestants for European Protestants. Those from a non European or non Protestant nation should be willing to play by the rules and live in that kind of a society sans welfare. This includes me. I’m orthodox and have some cultural quirks passed onto me but I assimilate to the greater society. America lets a bunch of people in, puts them on welfare, and tries to codling them in telling them that this isn’t an Anglo Saxon Protestant nation. I’m for immigration as long as those coming in remember what America is. No other country in the world does this. If I moved to China or the Philippines, or anywhere in LatAm, they would not be so generous. They know who they are.

 

[InspCallahan]

I think the Globo-Ho-Mo Economy will have to Be destroyed before folks come back to their senses and Understand that Nation Is Blood Ultimately.
Not too mention the Jewish Power will need to be removed and be revealed that they Hate Christian Europeans No matter the Character or Morality of those said Europeans. I think I can clearly say that Europeans for the most part stayed together before the finagling of the Economic Order and Social Engineering Programs that jews injected onto Europeans theough Media and Formal Education.

Got to get the Well Posioner out of the Equation before we talk of Hypothetical Immigration Policy. Folks are only now among Europeans are starting to Understand the low level Insidious war declared upon them the last 100 years of Modernity.

 

[KulturedKaveman]

Not too mention the Jewish Power will need to be removed and be revealed that they Hate Christian Europeans No matter the Character or Morality of those said Europeans.

Is it bad this developed my current position? Evangelical Christians don’t count. They’re just Jews. Only Orthodox and Catholic count. Sure, Episcopalians Presbyterian, Methodist, the faiths America was REALLY founded on, are respectable, and it’s a country for and by them. But most run of the mill “Christians” don’t count. They’re just Jews.

 

[InspCallahan]

I see that. But that doesn't mean i want 500K Africans and Indians brought into my area. And that's what they are doing a Genocidal Weaponized tool. Throttled up the last 5 or more years of course. But for the most part we got along without the Mississippi River full of European Blood from constant infighting, albeit once 160 yearsago, like happens elsewhere.

That is our church and us to try and persuade by living the word. Not easy mind you as we all Know.

 

[analyst_green]

America has a history and it is a European Protestant nation. It was founded by European Protestants for European Protestants. Those from a non European or non Protestant nation should be willing to play by the rules and live in that kind of a society sans welfare. This includes me. I’m orthodox and have some cultural quirks passed onto me but I assimilate to the greater society

There really is no such thing as a "Protestant nation". There are Lutheran nations, Anglican nations, Calvinist nations, etc... but Protestants are so disparate and an Anglican for example can be closer to Orthodoxy than he is to a Calvinist in some instances (CS Lewis being a great example). The Founding Fathers always intended for all Christians to peacefully coexist in America. Many of the Protestant groups we see today like Baptists barely even existed that time. Though there were no virtually no Orthodox back then, there was a decent sized Catholic population, a few of whom also number among the Founding Fathers. The rest were primarily Puritans, Calvinists and Anglicans, but no single denomination dominated.