Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: How to Counter the Argument That We Germanics Have No Right to USA or Other Countries Outside of Europe

  1. #1
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Nachtengel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Online
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    Thanked in
    404 Posts

    How to Counter the Argument That We Germanics Have No Right to USA or Other Countries Outside of Europe

    I recently talked to an American who was concerned about the ongoing program of White genocide in the Western World, who had difficulties speaking up against the mass immigration policies in his country. What was holding him back was the fact that America is considered to be the homeland of Native American Indians and not us Whites. He felt that it would be much easier for Europeans to be speak up and take action against these policies because Europe historically belongs to us Whites.

    This is a common conception expressed by pro-Whites, not only in America but also in other White majority countries outside of Europe.

    It might feel easier for us in Europe to be against Whites becoming a minority in our own countries because Europe has historically been considered White, but this is irrelevant to the anti-White mentality which we are up against. The anti-White mindset says that Whites must go. It aims for White genocide and consequently makes up justifications for mass non-White immigration into White majority countries.

    As mentioned above, in America one common anti-White justification is that America was not White to begin with, so Whites have no right to it. If this were true, it would imply that Germany, for example, could remain White, as it is originally a White country. But in Germany the justification is that Germany has a dark past with Nazism, and therefore the native white Germans are forced to accept mass immigration into their country and the fact that they are becoming a minority.

    The Dutch did not take land of Holland away from any native population, nor did they support Hitler. But this country still has to have mass immigration. One justification for this is that they had colonies hundreds of years ago.

    And if we take a look at Iceland, we can see the same pressure to have open borders – why is that? They did not take their land away from any native population, they did not support Hitler and they did not own colonies. The justification given here is that Iceland has a high standard of living and an aging population.

    In contrast, let us compare this to Japan. Japan was allied with Hitler, Japan had colonies and Japan has an aging population and a high standard of living. To boot, the people now living in Japan are not even the native population of the island. The people we now know as “Japanese” conquered the Ainu-people long ago. But despite all of this, Japan has not been forced to accept mass Third World immigration the way Germany, France and Sweden have. Why is that? The reason is that the anti-White mindset is anti-Whit, not anti-Asian.

    ainuThe Ainu people are the indiginous people of Japan, but no one would argue today that Japan does not belong to the Japanese.

    One important thing to take notice of here is that if you listen to just one of the anti-White arguments without comparing it to other similar situations in non-White areas of the globe, it might sound legit (such as the USA not being allowed to be White because it was non-White before the Europeans got there). But if you actually start to compare such arguments with other non-White cases like we did above, you will see that they are just justifications for more non-stop immigration into all White countries.

    Anti-Whites just invent plausible excuses for more non-stop Third World immigration into White countries. We, however, do not agree that one genocide justifies another.

    How to counter this?

    The way to break through this is to compare their justifications to other international contexts and point out their contradictions, like we did above. You have to point out the fact that nobody who says that Whites have no right to the USA/Australia etc. because they took the land away from a native population, would argue that Germany, or any other native White country, has the right to remain White because they did not take the land away from any native population.

    In addition to pointing out the contradiction of their statement, we also need to point out their intention, which is justifying White genocide through the means of non-stop Third World immigration into all and only White countries. Use the SCI-module below as a guide:

    Statement: Whites have no right to the USA (or any White country outside of Europe) because it was not White to begin with.

    Contradiction: One genocide does not justify another.

    Many groups have conquered another nation at some time in history. But that does not justify harming such groups today.

    The Anti-White Intention: To justify more mass immigration from the Third World into every predominately White country.

    Since they always argue for something that leads to more immigration into White countries, we can see their intention shining through. They do not care whether the country has had colonies or not, has been allied with Hitler or not, or has taken the land away from a native population or not. As long as it is a White majority country, anti-Whites will want it to open its borders to mass immigration and invent plausible arguments which will favour pro-immigration policies.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Nachtengel For This Useful Post:

  3. #2
    Senior Member Catterick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Last Online
    Thursday, September 7th, 2017 @ 12:29 AM
    Mixed Germanic and Celtic
    British Isles & Scandinavia
    Borreby x Nordic
    Other Other
    Single adult
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    Thanked in
    20 Posts
    Just point out that indigenous people have no strict definition, that excluded naturalised Euro-Americans: people move around, and as they settle they get a sense of place connected to themselves as a people (moreso than any past place of origin). And then they are indigenous themselves.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: Monday, April 2nd, 2018, 03:30 PM
  2. The Least & The Most Racist Countries in Europe
    By Northern Paladin in forum Immigration & Multiculturalism
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: Wednesday, March 29th, 2017, 04:52 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: Thursday, August 9th, 2012, 05:11 PM
  4. Germanics in South Africa Back in Europe
    By Teuton in forum Southern Africa
    Replies: 86
    Last Post: Wednesday, December 1st, 2010, 08:16 AM
  5. Future of Europe/USA?
    By DreamWalker in forum Questions About Germanics
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: Wednesday, April 26th, 2006, 06:54 PM


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts