No. Most people are still fiercely nationalistic outside of western europe and north america.

>>2575726
This, most Europeans are just cucks.

>>2575726
>Most people are still fiercely nationalistic outside of western europe and north america.
Meanwhile in the middle east
>MUH SUPREME. FUCKIN. CALIPHATE THAT STRETCHES OVER NATIONAL BOUNDARIES.
>GUYS WE'RE A NATION
>HAHAHAHA NO, YOU FROM ANOTHER TRIBE EVEN IF WE SPEAK THE SAME FUCKING LANGUAGE.
Yeap.

>>2575738
Nationalism is just tribalism writ slightly larger. Tribalism is still based around ethnocentric principles after all.

>>2575726
Please read carefully, you are not answering my question. I am talking about the merit of national identity sprung from nationalism. Nationalism isn't static, what it means now isn't what it was believed to be in the nineteenth century or the beginning of the twentienth.

So that there are fiercely nationalistic people (as much outside as inside 'the west' (if you live in korea 'the west' is in the east *mind blown*)) means that the merit of it (being in a cohesive group) is lost?

Read
Benedict Anderson - Imagined communties
Pierre Nora -lieux de memoires (places of memory)

Knowledge is cumulative

>>2575750
Good point. Can the ethnocentric principle fade over time due to awarness of 'the other'?

It never had any merit in the first place

>>2575761
By "nationalism" I mean identity born from ethnocentric principle as opposed to propositional principles like the so-called "civic identity" of the United States.

The former is predominant over the latter in about 90% of the world, both in de jure and de facto terms. I'd argue in the west it's also increasingly prominent, look at how politicians in multiracial empire-states like the US have to appeal to appeal to each tribal group.

>>2575765
True, true. So the nationstate that evolved from it, has no merit as well? I would agree to that.

Now, please tell me. In an idealistic world, how could you solve the educational problem? I would say start (and don't leave it at that) with the perspective. Flip for instance the narrative arround. Start with the present, work back slightley to the past. Don't lose your methode though, Ranke (although wrong in his Wie es eigentlich gewesen thought) set the beginning of professionalisation of history. Jan Romein warned for the influence of the laymen (in this regard, most people here) as the science of history and the public need of meaning and story uncontrollably drifted into the public sphere (read internet nowadays). The historian has unwillingly and uncontrollably given up on his profession by creating a blindspot when they started writing within the perspective of nations instead of the perspective of men (and woman but lets not bitch about that) etc etc etc. I am going to claim that back and restore vision. Now, Jan Romein was dutch and he wrote his ideas whilst being imprisoned by the Nazi's. He gave an account of his time. The source for this is in Dutch as he was dutch (not german so not deutsch aber dutch, The netherlands). His book is called 'In opdracht van de tijd' ('In service of Time' roughly translated).

So to come back to your argument, it never had any merit. Your comment doesn't have any merit as it is empty.

Knowledge is cumulative

>>2575802
>when they started writing within the perspective of nations instead of the perspective of men (and woman but lets not bitch about that)

The very oldest historians in the western tradition write from the point of view of nations, e.g. Herodotus listing out the great deeds of the barbarians. Or Livy's Ab Urbe Condita.

>>2575774

Good point, good point
I am aware of the civic and ethnitic priniciples of identity, bit rusty though. You have recent lit, that either disposes of or elaborates on this subject (or is a summary of the debat)?

I would be thankfull

>>2575807
His conception of historiography starts with Marx or some other leftard, he's just a dumb cuck.

>>2575807
anachronistic

>>2575810
There isn't much of a debate in the west because the idea of blood-based identity is verboten here, at least in Western Europe. As a good illustration of the divergence between West and non-West though, look at the concept of race in anthropology, in Western Europe and North America it is hardly ever used - In China, Japan and other East Asian states the overwhelming majority of anthropologists consider it a real and important concept however.

http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/374899?journalCode=ca

>>2575812
You still think in left and right. Who is the dumb cuck? Now we are binary, but like I said knowledge is cumulative. You're whole definition of what history is, is wrong.

>>2575821
Thanks!

Nationality is an unnecessary evil. Think about it, all human conflict arises from differences. Why would we want to be more different and not more the same?

The problem with nationalism is every person has a different view on what constitutes them.

For instance, you are a Breton living in a country named France based on secular civic nationalism born from the revolution against the forces of tradition, but one that enforces French language on all her subjects regardless of race or religion.

Your nation is what, exactly?

>>2575945
>human conflict arises from differences
absolute garbage

>>2575979
French nationalism isn't really civic nationalism, french minorities no longer properly exist and even in brittany most consider themselves as french and few would be favourable to an independent brittany

>>2575979
I am dutch. But the whole point is that that really doesn't matter. Or it shouldn't. I know it does. That is the reality. For me at least it doesn't really matter. It doesn't define me.

Now, I am not blind of the cultural and social bindings within (and between) regions scatterd around the globe. But nationalism doens't revolt against tradition, it sticks onto it like there is no tomorrow.

True that people start to identify with other things that their nation. But nationalism (read identification) still has merit in that it creates a cohesive cultural group. But the merit is gone when that cultural group is under the influence of the notion of 'the other'. And that awarness is groing rapidly (globalisation, migration, internet, social media etcetcetc). So that being said, national identities (different from but born out of natioanlism) is losing merit?

Not worldwide, def locally and personally. Just as the notion of 'the west', although being a reality and you may call it an unneccesary evil is locally and personally becoming empty. Nationality is empty, neccessary or not, evil or good, it undoubtedly is reality.

Now just as that is reality, so its internet social media, concepts, etc etc etc (you name it). You can't change that. We theorize to much, we are not practical. Language creates this blindspot of 'the other'.

('the other' is not just difference in ethnic groupings, religous, subcultures, cultures etc etc, it is also and maybe importantly between generations. Now how many people above 50? 40? 60? are on this board?

Your parents, my parents, my professors even, are missing the discussions that are on this history board. (I generalise, true, but for at least the dutch case, I belief this to be generally true).

For now I leave it at this. Just ponder, critic me, please do.

>>2575622
Nationalism was always a mistake.
Imperialism for the win!

>>2576045
sure sure, it was all with intent and pre-knowledge, set up by an all powerfull, mindcontrolling elite...:P

>>2576045
Een under imperialism there should be different cultural groups who coexist together.
If everyone becomes one culture te world would get boring as fuck.

File: 6a00d83451da9669e201156f45b294970c.jpg (173KB, 780x468px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 780x468px

Nationalism is pretty easy to understand yet all you faggot nay-sayers in the thread dont 'get' it because the modern world is a massive clusterfuck and erosion of nations history and cultural pride.

Lets put it this way: if you cannot trace an ancestor being born in the country you reside in 200 years ago, no are not a proper citizen and should be excluded from the rewards of said nation.

Ethno-Nationalism is where its at though. If your grandfather were French and settled in germany, renounced all of france and started speaking german only, marries a german girl, teaches his son all that is wonderful about the fatherland...Then by the Grandson, what indigenous German would be able to disern that his lineage was french?

...Try that with the same story but a guy from Trinidad. Or Tehran Or Bangkok Or some african hole, ethniclly speaking you will know, and ALWAYS know, they are not a true german.

>>2576123
>Lets put it this way: if you cannot trace an ancestor being born in the country you reside in 200 years ago, no are not a proper citizen and should be excluded from the rewards of said nation.
But there are plenty of countries that are less than 200 years old.
>about the fatherland...Then by the Grandson, what indigenous German would be able to disern that his lineage was french?
A biologist with a proper DNA sample. Or any guy knowing his family's history. Therefore whether he's a German or French is subjective and bases on the person's knowledge.

If the liberals are right and identities and loyalties and race is really as fluid as they claim, we should see a coherent American identity as strong as the ethnic chinese identity - but we don't, we see the opposite: The more heterogeneous America becomes, the more dysfunctional and balkanized it gets.

>>2576144
>coherent American identity as strong as the ethnic chinese identity
You mean besides the guys on the island. Great fucking example.

>>2576152
>You mean besides the guys on the island. Great fucking example.

You mean Taiwan? That's just a regional Chinese identity that doesn't want to have anything to do with the mainland - Taiwanese are only very marginally less ethnocentric than their cousins across the straits in Fujian, and they sure as fuck don't believe in "propositional identities".

>>2575622
National identity never had any merit. Its a tool the state uses to defend itself from other states, and can only hurt the individual, never aid him.

Basically a spook of the highest caliber.

>>2576163
China split in spite of ethnic Chinese identity but it's okay cause Taiwan has ethnic Chinese identity + hating mainland chinks.

Seems like ethnic identity doesn't work as well as intended.

>>2576180
I'm not sure what your point is. Taiwanese is still a de facto ethnic/racial identity, as is Chinese itself.

The two things I'm comparing here are the notion of identity based on common ancestry to identity based on proposition (aka "propositional identity").

Both Taiwan and China have de facto ethnocentric principles in determining identity, whereas the US is de facto propositional.

The coming century will see whether or not the American notion of identity based on proposition that supersedes other notions like race will work, and it's already not looking good.

>>2576187
My point is that China has a fair share of balkanization periods and even now they are "stable" only after splitting. Hong Kong also hates having their freedom taken away. It's stupid to judge that based on anecdotes.

Instability can have many causes not limited to ethnic identity. In fact USA is already a pretty old country and their identity has always had lot of propositions and merging between various European identities for example.

>>2576207
>My point is that China has a fair share of balkanization periods

The warring states periods are not comparable to what America is going through, since most of the time the breakup of a dynasty was not precipitated by racial/ethnic conflict, and if it was (e.g. Tang) it was Chinese vs. Outsiders.

Warring states were literally just competing factions who still all identified as part of hua.

>Instability can have many causes not limited to ethnic identity. In fact USA is already a pretty old country and their identity has always had lot of propositions and merging between various European identities for example.

Yes, and it would have been a lot more stable if it had remained predominantly Anglo. Introducing more European ethnicities, as well as blacks, into the body politic has undoubtedly made it less stable - and I say this as a Southern European mind - not some anglo supremacist.

Now you're going one step further and basically turning it into a microcosm of the entire world, albeit in America itself, with all of the attendant problems of the world too. Whether or not a coherent identity will emerge from this is up for debate - But the ultimate litmus test will be in the battle between PRC (ethnocentrism as identity) and USA (propositional identity) - If racial nationalism is so artificial, we should see the PRC break apart and the US go from strength to strength.

And if it does will it even be worth being part of? E.g. Brazilian identity is pretty goddamn meaningless beyond supporting Brazil at sport.

>>2576224
What american identity? The country's most memorable event is going to war with itself. There is state rivalry everywhere within the union. Talks of X or Y leaving the union since forever.

American identity is literally as you say, supporting the team at sports.

File: 1463218583369.jpg (50KB, 499x499px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 499x499px

>>2575765

File: 1470073244864.jpg (38KB, 389x310px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 389x310px

>>2576140

Yeah im aware some places have a short history but as far as most of europe is concerned theres no excuse to not know who the homogenous race that have claim to the land are.

The biggest problem is The USA. It was a mongrel beast very early on and it spolit it potential for a long time and is now making its final ugly form in the modern day. I laugh everytime an american acts like this came out of the blue. Yeah, no shit your country will fragment, it only stayed together so long because you kept the minoritys as an underclass/ sold a dream/tried to spin a 'culturally united history' as sufficant...

As to your other argument you missed the point entirely. Where as a you could hide and thereby remove the shackles of your old country by embracing a new country simply by blending in with the colour of your skin, the same can not be said if it is obvious you are clearly non-european. This was my example but it stands if we reversed it with and Scandinavian living in Bangladesh. He may speak the lingo and wear the cloths and act like a typical fellow there, but the bottom line is he's still a white man in a region where he is not naturally supposed to be and everyone will know it and treat him diffrently.

>>2576233
>What american identity?

American identity was originally Anglo. Then Anglo-Germanic, then pan-European, with each successive progression it has become less meaningful and more open to subversion.

>American identity is literally as you say, supporting the team at sports.

Right, but countries outside of the west don't think this way, to them their nation is a real organic thing - it's a representation and defense of their group identity on some primal level.

Even non-white ethnic groups in the west think this way.

>>2576224
>The warring states periods are not comparable to what America is going through, since most of the time the breakup of a dynasty was not precipitated by racial/ethnic conflict, and if it was (e.g. Tang) it was Chinese vs. Outsiders.
But stability isn't something that only bases on ethnic conflicts. You can't call yourself stable only because you never had a racial conflict, forget about all the other things.
> PRC (ethnocentrism as identity) and USA (propositional identity)
And what battle would be it and what would be the winning conditions? Because there are many more factors to country prosperity than just ethnic stability. You could point out plenty of homogeneous countries that are still somewhere between being troubled and shitholes. Hell economy doesn't run only on identities.

I doubt being more or less ethnocentric mattered when USA had just much larger industrial capacity compared to Japan in WWII.

>>2576253
>But stability isn't something that only bases on ethnic conflicts

I never said it was. We're talking about identity here though.

>Because there are many more factors to country prosperity than just ethnic stability. You could point out plenty of homogeneous countries that are still somewhere between being troubled and shitholes

All other things being equal, ethnic homogeneity is more desirable than ethnic heterogeneity. Of course, some nations are prosperous and stable in spite of ethnic heterogeneity - but never _because_ of these things (good example being Singapore's success based almost entirely off of Hakka Chinese).

>I doubt being more or less ethnocentric mattered when USA had just much larger industrial capacity compared to Japan in WWII.

Again, was this because the US was more ethnically heterogenous or because it had a larger population in total and larger land mass/resources?

>>2576144
Ow lets talk race!. How real is it or is it another word for ethnicity? In that case. who are we kidding with race? Empty concept!

>>2576268
>All other things being equal, ethnic homogeneity is more desirable than ethnic heterogeneity
Sure if you're only talking about inner stability of a nation. But outside of that think of it as something like this:
You're in a tribe
There are other tribes around you
If you merge together you will obviously be less stable but also have less power to act on other tribes, and in worst case a war between your neighbouring tribes might be even worse than some eventual splits.

Ability to rally a variety of people under your banner is hard, but powerful.

>>2576253
>And what battle would be it and what would be the winning conditions?

Economic and global influence.

More specifically - Indicators of living standards like: crime, proportion of country that is middle class, level of social dysfunction, livability of cities, life expectancy, average health indicators, academic rankings and so on.

At the moment the US is on top in a lot of these metrics, but PRC is catching up very, very fast. Remember Chinese view their nation as a reflection of themselves - when it performs badly they feel shame, and when it performs well they feel pride. You clowns always argue about how nationalism is just an excuse for feeling pride in your ancestors achievements, but that's a half-truth, it's about understanding that what your ancestors passed on to you is a torch you need to keep alight. In the US, where most white americans think their ancestors, especially their distant ones, were either dumb, wicked or both, this sort of mentality of collective inter-generational improvement is impossible.

But hey, at least you have more gay and transgender rights than they do.

File: considering the viability of multi-culturalism.jpg (771KB, 2764x2073px) Image search: [Google]

771KB, 2764x2073px

Humans are innately tribal. The sense of what exactly constitutes "your tribe" can be expanded into a nation state. That is, everyone who looks like you and speaks your language belongs to "my tribe", with all the implications this has for cooperation and altruism with the resulting socio-economic efficiency, and psychological well-being.

Research has shown, that it is, in principle, impossible to include a significant number of people who are overtly different looking into the conception of "of my tribe".

Thus, the nation state is the ideal human polity. Not for reasons of ideology, but because of human biology.
I don't think it's impossible to confederate nation states consisting of peoples with similar looks ("racial background") into a larger body, and have the nations grow closer over time, but as far as I know, this hasn't been demonstrated in practice yet.

Sure, you can argue that some other system would be better for the greater good, but reality is what it is, and history shows that alternatives are less stable and/or less conducive to human well being.

>>2575622
Even when people come to America from South American shitholes, they still proudly wave the flag of their mother country and curse America. Everyone is a nationalist except for goober middle class white cucks who just want to hold and and cry when they hear Imagine by John Lennon

>>2576282
>If you merge together you will obviously be less stable but also have less power to act on other tribes, and in worst case a war between your neighbouring tribes might be even worse than some eventual splits.

It's not that binary ("either you unite, EU-style pooling of resources, or you don't").

Take the Chinese example again - Han colonist farmers expanded after the Qin and Han expansion (as well as other dynastic expansion periods like the Tang and Qing), either married Han women or married the local women and basically bred the natives out of existence in these areas - that's exactly what happened in Guangdong.

Or take Taiwan since you mentioned it. Taiwan became Han Chinese through colonization and ethnic cleansing of the Austronesian natives. Not through "combining" with them as equals.

>Ability to rally a variety of people under your banner is hard, but powerful.

USA can't even rally its own citizens to its banner, let alone anyone else.

>>2576178
please, don't get confusing. The national identity as a whole is just as real as the state. The interpretations are just as divers. Lets be practical. You got to change the perspective. Nationalism created a national identity. The merit was identification with the other in the direct reality (locally, nationally, with borders).

Now captain hindsight says I didn't have any merit. That is now, the merit now is pretty much gone. The negative seems to override the positive that came from it. But the spook of the highest caliber is something we spooked ourselves with. No someone or something outside of humans. But in your comment I read a certain intentionistic view, that never really was there. People have little to no idea, what the effect (or affact idk) is of their actions on the long term. We pretend we do, but we can't know the future. Just the present and the past. (at least create a well-structured opinion about it)

>>2576236
Please, anyone, show me a (convincing) study on race where the conclusion is that there is a race, different from ethnicity.

>>2576292
>Take the Chinese example again - Han colonist farmers expanded after the Qin and Han expansion (as well as other dynastic expansion periods like the Tang and Qing), either married Han women or married the local women and basically bred the natives out of existence in these areas - that's exactly what happened in Guangdong.
Breeding out of existence is something funny, if you fuck enemy women you're still mixing with them,. It's also not so possible now that in the contemporary times every nation sooner or later hits their cap and replacement/below replacement rates.
>USA can't even rally its own citizens to its banner, let alone anyone else.
They have done reasonably well when the need arose.

>>2576302
It is in my interest to associate with people who can help me.
Nationalism is only a barrier separating me from some of those people, and forcing me into implied comradeship with people who can't help me, because we were born within 100 miles of each other and eat the same spices with our beans.

Nationalism is stupid on the individual level, stupid on the family level, stupid on the corporation level, and is overall stupid all the way to the state level, where its necessary to keep your slav... I mean citizens in check.

>>2576311
You know full well that that kind of study is not only taboo, but also basically impossible to conduct, since you can neither define and measure race nor ethnicity with sufficient precision and every distinction you would make would be somewhat arbitrary and easy to attack. Nevertheless it is immediately obvious to anyone that human races do in fact exist, and that people differentiate into ethnic or cultural groups along racial lines.

>>2576285
All agreed, but history shows as well that humans are umpredictable. With this knowledge in mind, what you just said. How do you transport that knowledge from generation to generation (and lets stick to reality indeed, so how in your own country, region what ever), in a way that is inclusive, stays openminded- remains critical etc etc. (keeps discussion alive without bashing in the head of 'the other' just because you don't understand him right away).

>>2576236
>As to your other argument you missed the point entirely. Where as a you could hide and thereby remove the shackles of your old country by embracing a new country simply by blending in with the colour of your skin, the same can not be said if it is obvious you are clearly non-european. This was my example but it stands if we reversed it with and Scandinavian living in Bangladesh. He may speak the lingo and wear the cloths and act like a typical fellow there, but the bottom line is he's still a white man in a region where he is not naturally supposed to be and everyone will know it and treat him diffrently.
So, if I just hide my black skin well enough, I can become European?

>>2576313
>Breeding out of existence is something funny, if you fuck enemy women you're still mixing with them,.

Sure. But identity tends to be patrilineal. Look at present day Cantonese (the offspring of these couplings), they almost all identify proudly as Han.

>It's also not so possible now that in the contemporary times every nation sooner or later hits their cap and replacement/below replacement rates.

Of course it's possible. Think about a nation like Iceland. A tiny proportion of the population of China or even South Korea could wipe Iceland out as a distinct nation state.

>They have done reasonably well when the need arose.

No they haven't. Look at the Vietnam War, the last time the American population was mobilized en masse. The level of dysfunction and lack of discipline in the average unit, especially those mixed ones, was unimaginably bad.

>>2576315
>Nationalism is only a barrier separating me from some of those people, and forcing me into implied comradeship with people who can't help me, because we were born within 100 miles of each other and eat the same spices with our beans.

this concept relies on mutual reciprocity.

The problem with you is the same problem with most liberals - you assume the ideas you hold are the default belief system of all homo sapiens.

What liberals need to do is to learn a non-western language and live in a place like China, the Gulf, South Korea etc for a couple of years and realize just how few people on this planet believe in concepts like racial universalism, outside of the white races.

>>2576342
>Sure. But identity tends to be patrilineal. Look at present day Cantonese (the offspring of these couplings), they almost all identify proudly as Han.
They are about as Han as an Ethiopian-German is German.
>No they haven't. Look at the Vietnam War, the last time the American population was mobilized en masse. The level of dysfunction and lack of discipline in the average unit, especially those mixed ones, was unimaginably bad.
Their actual war performance was amazing when it came to killing. The fault for losing the war was actually purely political.

>>2576342
>The problem with you is the same problem with most liberals - you assume the ideas you hold are the default belief system of all homo sapiens.
>What liberals need to do is to learn a non-western language and live in a place like China, the Gulf, South Korea etc for a couple of years and realize just how few people on this planet believe in concepts like racial universalism, outside of the white races.

What a terrible strawman.
I am not american, don't live in the "first world", english is my third language, am not "liberal", whatever you mean by that, have traveled a lot more than most humans, and overall you are full of shit.

It is within any person's best interest to associate with useful and helpful people, and avoid useless and unhelpful people.
Nationalism groups you with some useless people, and fences you away from some useful people. It is objectively BAD for the individual, and is against the individual's interests.

Now make an argument rather than a strawman.

>>2576327
Disagree. I agree that you can't determine it in totality. Not asking to. The mere fact that it is a taboo, makes it interesting to tackle. Ethinicity is cultural it is a feeling, you can't measure. Biologically speaking you most def can determine race. Race is more that just different psychical features. You're blatent conclusion that race exist because it is obvious is stupid. Race is a result of the misuse of Darwin's idea's by social sciences. It is in fact obvious to anyone and everyone that race and ethnicity are one and the same. Only one of them is a taboo, therefor we don't talk about it. Take a guess which one.

>>2576351
beautiful

>>2576350
>They are about as Han as an Ethiopian-German is German.

No. Their paternal line is Han. They cluster with other Han subgroups on principal component analysis of genetic markers, an "Ethiopian German" would not cluster with actual, real Germans by contrast because they have no ancestral connection to the country.

>Their actual war performance was amazing when it came to killing.

You mean when it came to relying on B-52s dropping napalm.

If their war performance was amazing they wouldn't have been unable to dislodge the VC from the North despite overwhelming air superiority and superiority in terms of equipment, amenities, medicine etc.

>>2575622
I doubt it. Political nationalism is still a pretty young concept going back to french revolution (declarations des droits de l'homme) and to some extent the american revolution (bill of rights). The shift went from deriving sovereignty from God to deriving sovreignty from the people - thus killing the "right to rule by heavenly mandate" forever. So to me nationalism at its core is intermarried withour modern democratic values, it's just too often understated and underappreciated by people who dont pay attention to such things. However the same people who "attack" nationalism are the same who make appeal to values that are derived from the very system nationalism has enabled to become possible (hard to grant human rights, basic income, freedom of thought &expression, etc etc). None of this is enforcable without accepting that PEOPLE have a right to self-determination.

Cynics will attack and say I conflate modern democratic values with nationalism but I am not arguing that - I am arguing instead that for the shift from monarchy to democracy in a world kingdons & empires to take place, nationalism had to be the stepping stone to enforce such a shift. Today's "globalists" are nothing more than federalists who still build their arguments and practical application of their agenda on the same premise as modern democracy - thqt the people of a certain land and/or ethnicity have the right to self rule, and that'd we hope they exercise that right to join our union.

>>2576351
I am also not American, my first language is not English, etc etc.

Where in the third world do you live?

>It is within any person's best interest to associate with useful and helpful people, and avoid useless and unhelpful people.

Sure, but these describe utilitarian business-like relationships. Not a coherent group identity of any kind.

>overall you are full of shit.

In respect to what, the idea that the non-western world does not believe in racial universalism you mean?

>>2576330
>history shows as well that humans are umpredictable
Some things are rather predictable. Males are stronger than females. The different in build will remain the same throughout all of human history and be present in all cultures, and based on it some things will be very similar in most cultures.
Very few things are truly random, and deviations from the biological basis will eventually break down and be replaced by something that is able to enlist and satisfy instincts and impulses better.

>how to not be racist
People are naturally wary of The Other, but if they have neutral or good experiences, they become somewhat indifferent to their existence. Nobody wants to cohabitate with The Other, but that doesn't mean you can't have friendly relations. How many Japanese actually hate Americans or Europeans who don't live in Japan? Probably very few. Millions of Japanese visit these places every year. They buy our goods, and we buy theirs. There's no enmity. And that's an overtly racist and xenophobic civilized people.

I think Europe was a much more ideal place a few decades ago, before the EU really took off and the Muslim populations reached a critical mass. Being surrounded by many friendly foreign nations that still look the same and have some similar values teaches people to be inclusive and accepting and to be friendly with each other.

Unfortunately it wasn't understood how exactly this works, and what the limitations are, so Europe self destructed and is now slowly decaying to a state somewhere in between the Balkans and the Middle East.

>muh identity based around permissively giving out a travel document to whoever spends a few years living in a particular geographical area is WAY more real than actual kinship bonds guys!!!!!!

lol.

>>2576382
Can you not agree with a propositional identity but also agree that citizenship of western nations is given out way too easily these days? 99% of the foreign citizens of my country shouldn't hold our passport, but the 1% who should I have no opposition to really.

I do agree it's sort of odd that liberals would build a notion of citizenship around how you define yourself and then just turn it into a formality for whomever holds residence for a short while.

It's also why I dislike that whole conservative talking point of being ok with immigrants provided they "come here to work and pay taxes". Just because they want to make money in your country doesn't mean they actually love it.

>>2576372
>Sure, but these describe utilitarian business-like relationships. Not a coherent group identity of any kind.

If I am a guitarist, and I go to South America to join a band, I will associate with identity groups there - people of similar interests, into music, the band, our fans, and so on.
Is passion utilitarian? Is love utilitarian? Is the pursuit of academic knowledge utilitarian? Is sports excellence utilitarian? Did all the foreign volunteers fighting in the Spanish civil war do so for utilitarian reasons?

You are either a very limited man, or are intentionally limiting yourself to avoid the obvious contradictions to your words.
Nationalism does one thing - it draws borders. And as it is 100% certain there will be people you want to work with, live, appreciate, e share passions with, and so on, on the other side of those borders; and it is 100% certain that there are people you hate, dislike, don't understand, on your side of these borders - the borders are bad for you.

Nationalism makes it so I never become friends with that guy abroad who is just like me, and forces me to share purpose with this guy down the street who is the opposite of me, and whom I hate. It is wrong, and it is oppression.

Nationalism is a tool of the state to mobilize the individuals to protect it from other states, and it serves no purpose for the individual. It is bad for the individual, and it limits the individual.

>>2576368
>No. Their paternal line is Han. They cluster with other Han subgroups on principal component analysis of genetic markers, an "Ethiopian German" would not cluster with actual, real Germans by contrast because they have no ancestral connection to the country.
Ethiopian German as in a guy bringing his jungle fever girl to Germany and having a child. He still has ties to Germany.
>You mean when it came to relying on B-52s dropping napalm.
Do you want them to fight in melee? Technological superiority is also part of war.
>If their war performance was amazing they wouldn't have been unable to dislodge the VC from the North despite overwhelming air superiority and superiority in terms of equipment, amenities, medicine etc.
USA had the problem of going into a war nobody wanted, and fighting an enemy who fought for his survival. You can only win those by installing a friendly government who can hold its own while losing as little people as possible.

It was a war of massacring the Vietnamese and hoping your own people don't get tired of it. And again, failing in Vietnam isn't something specific than only the USA managed.

File: Good+goyim+_0160e34052b6c2d3e04aaf32b9c3e9e5.jpg (50KB, 385x289px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 385x289px

>>2576388
>I do agree it's sort of odd that liberals would build a notion of citizenship around how you define yourself and then just turn it into a formality for whomever holds residence for a short while.

That was done by design goy. French/British/etc citizenship wasn't easy to obtain prior to the era of mass immigration.

>>2576355
>It is in fact obvious to anyone and everyone that race and ethnicity are one and the same.
That is a confusion.

Ethnicity usually includes racial parameters. You can have groups based on religious or civil allegiance, but they will not be as tightly bound as ethnic groups and will be able to be swept away by politic storms or social upheavals. Look at German history during the 20th century. Do you really think the US population would hold together in unity through such changes?

Even though race is a necessary component of ethnic identity, that doesn't mean every member of a race shares the same ethnic identity. Many European ethnicities cannot be differentiated based on looks. Yet nobody would claim they are the same ethnic group.

Thus, your statement is wrong.

>>2575726
Same in latin america, there is no nationalism except when it comes to football.

>>2576394
>Ethiopian German as in a guy bringing his jungle fever girl to Germany and having a child. He still has ties to Germany.

Sure, after enough inter-generational breeding back into the paternal race - his offspring will be as German as any other.

>Do you want them to fight in melee? Technological superiority is also part of war.

And yet they still couldn't win.

>USA had the problem of going into a war nobody wanted, and fighting an enemy who fought for his survival. You can only win those by installing a friendly government who can hold its own while losing as little people as possible.

I'm a results driven person. The VCP took the whole of Vietnam after forcing the US to leave, what the reasons were are irrelevant - the US suffered a strategic loss in Vietnam.

>>2576391
>If I am a guitarist, and I go to South America to join a band, I will associate with identity groups there - people of similar interests, into music, the band, our fans, and so on.

We're talking about the formation of nations here: Rome, Athens, Anglo-Saxon England etc. If you can form a nation around these principles with people prepared to die for each other, then sure. It's as meaningful as race, until then - it isn't.

>Nationalism makes it so I never become friends with that guy abroad who is just like me

No it doesn't. You're conflating things again here.

Suppose I'm your friend, and you ask me to stay at my apartment because you're a leftist bum - and I agree and let you stay for a couple of weeks after which point you show no initiative to actually get a job and move out - Am I not your friend if I turn around and ask you to leave? Is the litmus test of friendship letting someone live in your family home for the rest of your life while contributing nothing?

>and it serves no purpose for the individual.

The individual cannot survive without a group to protect him. Group identity and individual identity are symbiotic, which is precisely why I described your racial nationalism as contingent upon mutual reciprocity. The moment someone turns around and forms an identity based on ethnic solidarity that rallies men to come round to estate/house/hovel and appropriate it in the name of their nation, then you're fucked, since you have no comparable group to call to your aid - since you are a speshul snowflake individual.

I come from a country dominated by delusional gommunists/anarcho-twats like you by the way.

>>2576422
I assure you the Chinese diasporas who live in your nations are still just as loyal to their homelands though.

>>2576437
>Rome, Athens
City states are hardly nations, no matter how many people they subjugate.

>>2576371
Really well put! Never saw it in that light. There is a truth in that.

Knowledge is cumulative :) Whoop Whoop!

>>2576437
"Rome" is not a nation.
"Athens" is not a nation.
"Anglo-Saxon England" is not a nation.
You don't know what a nation is.
Look up when nations started forming, under what conditions and considerations, and what a nation entails.

And you can have a group without a nation. You can CHOOSE which group you want, who belongs in, who doesn't. This is the better way to do things for the individual.

>>2576441
They absolutely are nations in the classical sense. "Natio" in Latin literally means kin. These people considered each other kin in the purest, most biological sense of the term - namely that they derived ancestry from some common founder figure.

>no matter how many people they subjugate

If they subjugate people and rule over them, then they increasingly cease to be Nations - you've got it the wrong way round. States which rule over vastly heterogeneous populations aren't nations, but empires composed of multiple nations which have to manage conflict between these groups as part and parcel of their modus operandi - much like contemporary America is.

>>2576434
>Sure, after enough inter-generational breeding back into the paternal race - his offspring will be as German as any other.
No, it will be just diluted. That's given he only breeds with German women etc. We have bred Neanderthal into extinction yet we still have their genes. Might as well accept normal black people too since their genes will be just as diluted after 1 more generation.
>I'm a results driven person. The VCP took the whole of Vietnam after forcing the US to leave, what the reasons were are irrelevant - the US suffered a strategic loss in Vietnam.
No shit, USA took a strategic loss there but it's hardly about their poor fighting capability. There were plenty more ethnocentric nations who failed to just beat Vietnam.

And if you like results, look how USA is still number 1 military power of the world.

>>2576450
>These people considered each other kin

No, you nigger, there were "houses" and "families" and so on. The country wasn't your kin, and you'd conspire with your actual kin to fuck the country for your own benefit.
Nepotism exists for a reason, and it wouldn't be possible by definition if nations were kin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zadruga
This is what you mean, and this is basically an eastern european model extended family, or in the west a clan.
A clan isn't a nation.

>>2576446
>Look up when nations started forming, under what conditions and considerations, and what a nation entails.

You're thinking of a nation state as opposed to pre/early-modern monarchies, confederacies, empires etc. The thing is, these states were still composed of multiple nations - which is why they were so fractious to begin with (e.g. Austria-Hungary).

Nation is derived from Latin and was used commonly by authors like Livy to describe exactly what I'm describing - people who identify with a common genus as their primary group identity.

>And you can have a group without a nation.

Sure you can, which is why I advise you to put your own theories of group formation to the test and try and form a coherent state based around ideas like "we all like this shitty music subculture".

>"Rome" is not a nation.

Wrong.

>"Athens" is not a nation.

Wrong.

>"Anglo-Saxon England" is not a nation.

Wrong.

How many times must libtards be proven wrong on /his/? You're like fucking masochists I swear.

>>2576450
I think the definition of nation implies the existence of similar but differentiable tribes within the body of the nation, otherwise "nation" becomes a synonym of "tribe".

>States which rule over vastly heterogeneous populations aren't nations, but empires composed of multiple nations which have to manage conflict between these groups as part and parcel of their modus operandi - much like contemporary America is.
Or the Roman Empire.

>>2576457
>>"Rome" is not a nation.
>Wrong.
>>"Athens" is not a nation.
>Wrong.
>>"Anglo-Saxon England" is not a nation.
>Wrong.

Do you have a single fact to back that up?
Because its pretty established what a nation means, when nations started, and that those both not fit and predate the definition.

>>2576380
It is for sure predictable in its unpredictabilty. But what I meant. With captain hindsight in mind. No Roman or greek or prussian or dutch or chinese or canadian or who ever can look into the future. But we are predictable in that that is one of the things we are so focussed on. When I talk about all humans, I take humanity as a whole. I try at least to deconstruct what I have been told and what I think about it in order to reconstruct it again and again and again. Every day. I see merit in discussion more than in the subject per se. As history is discussion. (based on the notion that reality (now, then and tomorrow is without a doubt real).

(I am glad that I didn't decide yesterday to not return to this board. I gave starting a thread a go, and you all (most:p) make me hopefull about the potential of history as a science).

Knowledge is cumulative, but useless and static without friction and discussion.

>>2576453
>No, you nigger, there were "houses" and "families" and so on.

Uh what?

You do realize this doesn't invalidate what I'm talking about?

>"Classical authors who actually lived in antiquity were wrong!"
>"I'm right because I'm a speshul snowflake individual!"

Back to /lit/ champ.

>A clan isn't a nation.

It absolutely can be.

>>2576451
>No

So I'm just imagining all those modern day Cantonese calling themselves Han by exactly the same process?

>Might as well accept normal black people too since their genes will be just as diluted after 1 more generation.

More like after 5 or 6.

>but it's hardly about their poor fighting capability

Again. They failed to achieve their objectives not only strategically but tactically. If they were such a superlative fighting force why could they not dislodge Ho Chink Minh and his VC/Vietminh from the North?

>There were plenty more ethnocentric nations who failed to just beat Vietnam.

China literally occupied them for 800 years, lol.

>>2576470
>an extended family is a nation
>and a clan is a nation
>and states are nations

So a nation is a nation made of nations which are made of nations. Hang yourself, moron.

And the modern definition of the word nation, which is used for other purposes by older authors, and has gone through translation hell to reach you in whatever twitter post you read, is not an argument. Read a fucking book.

>>2576465
>Do you have a single fact to back that up?

All of these states fulfill the classical definition of a nation.

What more proof do you want?

>and that those both not fit and predate the definition.

Whoops. You'd better go back 2000 years and tell Livy that then!

>>2576474
>which is used for other purposes

It has always been used to mean a group of people who identify as part of a collective group based on kinship bonds. Always. That is why classical antiquity with rife with cities identifying themselves with particular founder figures whose supposed progeny all of the citizen body were descended from.

What you're getting confused by is the collective fiction that modern western "nations" are actually nations. They're not. They're empire-states composed of different tribes/nations.

>>2576480
>if the term don't fit, just make your own snowflake definition
>fuck every other person and definition, they are all jewish lies

All smiles :)

>>2576470
>So I'm just imagining all those modern day Cantonese calling themselves Han by exactly the same process?
I am sure you will accept a black person calling himself European, or all those half breeds saying they are (nation) before shooting someone.
>More like after 5 or 6.
Nah generally after a black person fucks a german women you're at the starting point of the previous example.
>China literally occupied them for 800 years, lol.
I am sure more recent example of France is better. I really wonder how stupid you're to think some magic ethnic identity gives you better chances of occupying an enemy country rather than relatively close distance versus literally on the other hemisphere, or lack of political will to fight.

>>2576484
>just make your own snowflake definition

That's the complete opposite of what I'm doing. I believe words should have literal meanings - and that's exactly what I'm doing here, I'm applying the literal meanings of words like Empire and Nation to describe contemporary and historical state of affairs rather than just turning them into rhetorical playthings.

For example, moderns would claim France is a nation when it clearly isn't and is more akin to a multi-ethnic empire at this point.

>>2576487
>I am sure you will accept a black person calling himself European, or all those half breeds saying they are (nation) before shooting someone.

4 or 5 generations down the line? Sure I would.

>Nah generally after a black person fucks a german women you're at the starting point of the previous example.

Yes, that's different - children tend to inherit identity from their father.

>I really wonder how stupid you're to think some magic ethnic identity gives you better chances of occupying an enemy country

Yeah, it's not like people feeling as if they belong to a single group makes them more cohesive than a balkanized bullshit identity like the modern "American" one when facing war conditions right?

>or lack of political will to fight.

The lack of political will directly relates to the fact the population was and is so dysfunctional and heterogeneous in the first place.

>>2576489
>Nation: a large body of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular state or territory.
Nowhere does it say kin. We have words for what you are saying - clan, house, zadruga, extended family, and so on.
They don't scale as high as you might think, and are not nations. A nation has a different, larger scale meaning.

You are objectively wrong and are making up fake definitions to appear correct, and I don't even know why, since you still can't explain how a nation helps the individual. It just tells him to avoid X useful people, and associate with Y useless people, because hurr durr muh clan.

>>2576497
>Yes, that's different - children tend to inherit identity from their father.
They inherit genes from both and expression of those depends upon other things like dominant/regressive traits etc.
>Yeah, it's not like people feeling as if they belong to a single group makes them more cohesive than a balkanized bullshit identity like the modern "American" one when facing war conditions right?
I am sure they needed to feel one identity at that time and not an actual reason to lose their family.
>The lack of political will directly relates to the fact the population was and is so dysfunctional and heterogeneous in the first place.
It surely doesn't correlate with superficial goals that have no effect on the average Joe who would rather stay home.

>>2576501
>Nowhere does it say kin.

Where did you pull this definition from? The Latin "Natio" is an explicitly vocative term relating to the circumstances of one's birth.

>You are objectively wrong and are making up fake definitions to appear correct

t. Man who won't even source his own definition.

>since you still can't explain how a nation helps the individual

I have already explained this:

Let's suppose you achieve your ultimate ideal of stateless individuality - suppose a particular ethnic group come along and decide that your house/hovel now belongs to them.

Who will you turn to for help?

>They don't scale as high as you might think, and are not nations. A nation has a different, larger scale meaning.

All arbitrary.

>>2576504
>They inherit genes from both and expression of those depends upon other things like dominant/regressive traits etc.

Right, but identity tends to derive from the father.

>I am sure they needed to feel one identity at that time and not an actual reason to lose their family.

Huh?

I'm saying that it makes it easier to prosecute a war if your state is composed of people who all feel like they belong to the same group.

>It surely doesn't correlate with superficial goals that have no effect on the average Joe who would rather stay home.

The Korean War was just as superficial from the perspective of the PRC, yet the Chinese fought the Americans to a standstill.

>>2576511
>i know one word in latin
The latin "natio" isn't the modern nation. There were no nations when "natio" was used.
It was fucking used to refer to a collection of the latins AND the separate foreign people they conquered, for fucks sake.
The root of the word being natio doesn't mean the word means the same thing as the old natio.

>source
Any dictionary. Oxford, Merriam, Webster...

>you need a nation to protect you from bullies
You can have an institution like the fucking police, for example.
The police isn't a nationalist institution. It is a state institution, nation is irrelevant.

>my arbitrary borders beat established convention
No.

>>2576416
Ow I like your style.

Politically the US may be a unity, but socially I don't see it. And you don't have to live in the US to see it. As groups get bigger and more divers, that thight bonding becomes loose (don't call me a marxist or whatever, marx tried to predicit the future, is impossible. That is not the point I am making) Now, more than ever, the awarness of others is hugh. This creates both a blind spot for the other as well for yourself. This blindspot (and we can debate what creates that, call it language, call it a multitude of factors, a list so big, where would you begin) resulted in racial think. Tell me, in what way is someone born in Africa, Europe, American (NATION OF IMMIGRANTS), inherently, and let me emphasize the word inherently, different from a person born in an other continent than his own. We aren't. Sure we can debate all day about ethnicity.

I even agree with you that my definition of ethinicity is outdated and it is far far faaaar more complex than I can describe on this board. Europe is full of different ethnicites. But the term ethnicity, at least here, in my direct surrounds, is becoming more and more sallow, empty. Internet hollowed it out. Me, a Dutch man, can share my thoughts via this medium. Within minutes I can get a respons back, telling me that I am wrong or right. Telling me I am a leftist European cuck, whatever. Hollow terms.
Where is the Eureka moment in that?

Knowledge is cumulative, it can die in discussion and it can florish. Friction is essential. All I can do is make myself as clear as I can, the effort for that lies with me. But I can't do more than reach out, scream, waiting to be heard and critise, myself and the other

Now, stop the whining and be proactive :)

>>2576416
>You can have groups based on religious or civil allegiance, but they will not be as tightly bound as ethnic groups and will be able to be swept away by politic storms or social upheavals. Look at German history

My fucking sides.
German history is literally a collection of religious or civil allegiances trumping ethnicity.

>>2576457
True, we need practical solutions. Anachronistics have a merit when it comes to perspective in time but in language, not per se when it comes to notion of ideas like Nation, nation-state, The state, government, rulers etc etc

>>2576523
>The latin "natio" isn't the modern nation. There were no nations when "natio" was used.

please_be_a_troll.jpg

Again, you are confusing the term "Nation" with some historiography that asserts the "Nation State" was a radically different form of statecraft compared to anything that came before.

>You can have an institution like the fucking police, for example.

So... You're going to have a concept like a police force with no over-arching authority that governs them?

Or are you arguing in favor of a state, but just a state to which nobody has any sort of higher loyalty to, in defense of individuality, in which case what is to stop those members of the police force who are part of ethnic group Y identifying with ethnic group Y when they come to take over this particular polity you're inhabiting?

>state

A state has to be based on something. If I understand you correctly you believe in states but not states based on any sort of identity, in which case, as I said, what is to stop the people who happen to live within this arbitrary geographical division identifying along racial/ethnic lines and engaging in things like racial/ethnic nepotism anyway?

>No.
>What makes X a nation is because they're bigger than Y

Not an argument. Is Russia more of a nation than Estonia?

>>2575622
I don't see how. People in my nation have always seen ourself as superior to everyone else, and outsiders as people we have to show piety on for not being born here. If you're not from around here you're dumber, uglier and most likely less wealthy than a native and as a superior beings we keep being humbled by our own existence.

>>2576422
talk for yourself, buddy. People here hate the government but love the country

>t.Uruguayan

>>2576554
*speak for yourself

>>2576533
Hmmm I would rather say you can conclude that ethnicity is not a rigid term, it refers to shared cultural and physical aspects. Although all of that can be stretched. Yes a lot of germans are germanized slavs or even celts, but differentiating race in neighbouring tribes points to a lack of understanding of the term.

>>2576533
Didn't a lot of those religious allegiances overlay ethnic differences to begin with though? Similar to how Northern Ireland is as much an ethnic conflict as it is religious.

>>2575726
Okay, Guys! Lets rap this up. Make some conclusions.

The questions was:

Has national identity lost in or its merit in worldwide perspective. Maybe it hasn't lost its merit, but it is fair to say it has lost in merit.

Sure, it is replaced by other concepts. The individual still lives in a group. The rang of the lose of merit, or how big this was and how big the difference between the new and old concept is, can't be answered in an afternoon.

So, within reason, national idenity (in some places), is losing its merit (for groups and/or individuals).

Please add and steer/correct.

>>2576586
You're not describing an idea - you're describing a biological imperative or tendency towards identifying with people who you have more genetic kinship with.

Even the people ITT who are hurr durr'ing about their individuality don't understand that they're proving my point in their defense against it because the notion of individualism trumping collective identities in of itself is a European/Western concept and doesn't really carry much currency among non-white people.

>>2576589
aaah ffs. Sure, it originated in 'the west', doesn't make it exclusive to 'the west'.

You're generalization of non-white people is a shame and shows ur individual blinded mind. The race card is being slipped in again, it is idiotic and outdated, If race is true, than your inferior since you clear can't stop overtheorizing. Now, race isn't true (at least other than human).

You don't understand that you are not really making a point, you are just going to far in you devils advocacy mind trip, that you can't see it anymore.

>>2576489
>France isn't a nation
wat

>>2576606
>doesn't make it exclusive to 'the west'.

Technically? No. But you'd be hard pressed to find a significant body of people outside of a western country who identify as "human first" in the same way liberals do.

>it is idiotic and outdated

It clearly isn't though. Given that the world's next superpower is highly racially conscious and always has been (the world's oldest anti-miscegenation laws come from Imperial China).

>You're generalization of non-white people is a shame

Your assumption that I'm condemning them for being relatively more ethnocentric is a mistake, and betrays your biased morality. Universalism is no more moral than ethnocentrism, in fact the former is far more dangerous and creates far more unhappiness since it autistically tries to force groups of people to live together who clearly don't like one another (e.g. Mudslimes and Europeans).

>>2576607
Modern day France is an empire-state composed of sub-saharans, maghrebis etc.

File: 1471490225477.jpg (2MB, 2439x3504px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2439x3504px

>>2576311
>>2576327
you two seem to have your own thing going, im not a scientist so i cant add much thats not already been said in you te'te-ue-te'te.


>>2576336
>just hide that im black, be european..?

Possibly, though never 'become' a European, you could live your life amongst them in a positive manner. however if that were the case the only other requirement would be that you be castrated so as not to breed with any of the locals. it would be cruel to your child when all is said and done in such a society.

On the other hand you could be a token black who is viewed with the curiousity and awe of a minor celebrity. So provided you behaved, adding a little spice as far as your personality would be permissable in such a place (again though, you would be castrated so as to not cause some form of fiasco/embaressment.)

Oh and im equal in that castration thing.any white/asian/whatever living in africa would also meet the same fate in my world.

>>2576586
Kin-selection, or group selection, is an ever-evolving process ' usually restricted by logistics such as material requirements to economically support the next phase, common language and moeurs to prop up the proper legislative/adminstrative basis to enable the rule of law. When those criterias are met, tribes can become cities, cities can become states, states can become unions, etc. It's a syncretic process happening in extreme slow-motion.

I absolutely believe "globalism" is inevitable, but I also believe we are still a long way off from meeting the requirements to make it possible yet. There are still too many economic and cultural challenges to permit the next "shift". That's why modern accelerationists are dangerous ideologues, they conflate global international trade with the ability to meet those criteria I listed. And their desire move past them is inevitably going to lead to more bloodshed.

only a cuckold would look at the recent invention called nationalism and think that these arbitrary borders actually existed in the past

nationalism is anti white

>>2576659
>nationalism is anti white

What is pro-white then?

>arbitrary

Go wander into the territory of a pride of lions and tell them that there's nothing tangible actual denoting them therefore these borders don't exist.

>>2576628
>Modern day France is an empire-state composed of sub-saharans, maghrebis etc.
That makes no sense. If France was still ruling algeria, I would agree. But that's not the case, those are migrants practicing ghettoisation in the core nation state because their government is accepting migratory waves faster than it can assimilate them. The development of factionalism within a nation is not imperial in the slightest.

>>2576547
>again you are confusing my opinion with fact

For the last time, I promise. I'll let you rot the thread in peace.

>>2576670
>those are migrants practicing ghettoisation

This makes it sound like it's some sui generis thing. What's going on is the natural consequence of having a demographically unmanageable alien group within your country that you've allowed to nominally enter your body politic too.

>The development of factionalism within a nation is not imperial in the slightest.

Factionalism implies there's nothing racial about it.

>>2576676
Not an argument.

>>2576123
kill yourslef my guy

>>2576123
Nationalism is the belief that you should help alcoholics and rapists, because you share a geographical area with them. Its retarded.

Nationalism is just us as social animals growing larger and larger and using aspects as common ground, those being national identity. It can only progress to two ends, with the complete collapse of civilization or destruction of the human race, or the unification of Earth under one planetary national identity.

Only time will tell.

>>2576711
It's the complete opposite, nationalists view the nation as an organic thing which needs to be preserved and enhanced by cutting out those elements which are cancerous inter-generationally.

The only people who believe in constantly coddling recidivist violent criminals are libtards dude. Nationalists almost to a man want to see them executed.

The greatest lie /lit/libs ever spin is that nationalism is about baseless pride. It's not. It's about inter-generational improvement. About each generation of your kinfolk being a bit more refined, a bit more intelligent, a bit more better looking, a bit more healthy etc.

>>2576690
>What's going on is the natural consequence of having a demographically unmanageable alien group within your country
I already acquiesced to that when I said the flow of migration was too high/too fast for assimilation to occur.

>Factionalism implies there's nothing racial about it.
Factionalism can imply whatever you want it to. All it takes is formation of sub-units entering into a dispute within a larger entity. The undertones of that dispute could be economic, cultural, racial, religious, political, whatever you want it to be. Semantic wordplay gets the argument (and consequently the solution) nowhere.

>>2576724
>Factionalism can imply whatever you want it to.

Right, but it's purposefully imprecise language. Balkanization or racial tension describes it in more detail.

>>2576628
Good good good, thanks for the mirror. I needed that for sure. Now for a minute lets stay on the theoretical part, as indeed it is a hard cooky to crack to find such body. etc

I lost myself indeed in universalism, which in itself is no more moral (or less) than ethnocentrism. Now, anything being forced down the throat creates, to say the least, a dislike:P between the enforcer and the enforced.

When I say it is outdated and idiotic, it is my personal opinion. You're argument that reality is different, is as valid as reality itself. So again, you are right. But it doesn't mean that the soil on which thought about race originated (social darwinisme, peoples need to scapgoat, to hold on to what you have, to let 'the other' be a reality that is a danger for your own existence.) (and again you can argue and argue about murders, thiefs etc. But I think humans are dual, good and evil, yes and no, right and wrong, we need friction to question) in todays light, with the right perspective (of hindsight) can't be called outdated and idiotic, therfor race,racism etc itself as well. The fruit has turned so sour, truth is gone. How can some say there are alternative facts and so shamelessly get away with that. (I refrain from getting political or religious, one is a discussion that is to complex, the other isn't relevant at all for science can never answer it)

Some one here said, there is a taboo on race. Fuck that taboo.

My morality is biased, it is my own. I formulate it and the 'compass' is me in combination with the you and the effect. But it is my truth. I defiate from facts and stats, not my own feeling. I know myself.

I am not saying we should force people living together, won't work.

And it is clear that adults don't like eachother. A child is blind for what is going on in the world. We tell them waaay to little. With a reason, it is complicated. But the same blindness is also there when you put childern (say aged 4ish)from different ethnicities together

>>2576755
>And it is clear that adults don't like eachother. A child is blind for what is going on in the world. We tell them waaay to little. With a reason, it is complicated. But the same blindness is also there when you put childern (say aged 4ish)from different ethnicities together

Incorrect.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/10770563/Babies-show-racial-bias-study-finds.html

Ethnocentrism is innate.

>>2576766
The study shows babies like people who look like their parents, not that they understand race (which is a political term, not a genetic one, read up on clustering).

Basically shock media misquoting science, as usual.

>>2576755
Now, call me marxist, utopic, leftish or whatever all you want. The things I identify with, you can't know, you don't know the person. You see words on screen and fill in your own meanings.

The way I see it, people (as a species as an individual) are born with a retrograde memory lose of the past and have no notion of time anymore.

To fix this perspective is to challeng the eduactionstyle. To challeng history itself. The narrative is of a hugh influence. So change it. Start telling your students in what time they are growing up and give them the perspective of time (as the historian is the ultimate teacher, but this means he has to keep on subject and keep educating himself). No there are as many possible aspects to this as there are people:). But I can't know what the effect in the future is, all I know it is worth trying.

Intention is often missing in text and context. Now you know mine.

>>2576736
I don't think it is, you're just begging the question with an intent to make it about race. The muslim migrants don't integrate because they are arabs, they don't integrate because they're piss-poor muslims arriving in too large numbers.

>>2576790
>make it about race

The hour is later than you think if you don't think it's already about race.

Sub-Saharans in Paris are just as bad as the Maghrebis, if not worse.

The problem with the term "factionalism" is that it usually describes parts of what was once whole breaking down and engaging in conflict, but that's not what happened here. Ethnic French and Maghrebis and Senegalese and what have you were never part of the same group.

(So work backwards in time) (many possible negative aspects)

>>2576794
>it's about race
>posts nationalities instead
And those nationals are economically-disadvantaged muslims. Shit education, poverty, archaic beliefs, language barrier.

THAT's the problem here. Not the colour of their skin or shape of their skull. And like I said already, the problem is mostly a numbers game. Too many, too fast. Fix that and you can immediately address the logistic issues about the french system being unable to cope with assimilating them - aka controlled migration.

File: 1472608767553.jpg (185KB, 804x1052px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 804x1052px

>>2576708
wow what a ripping retort, you sure showed me you Fat headed, short sighted, Globalist Twat.

If you want a real response, try making an argument next time x

>>2576711
LoL what a bullshit trail of thought, was going to respond but >>2576718 summed it up nicely, thank man.

>>2576789
I read all that you have said, poring your heart ond very being into word and as much as i want to understand all i feel is sick. Like what you have said is so-and i hate to bring in this dimesion as im no saint- morally void. Like, dont you see how, for lack of a better word, evil it is to essentially expoit childrens minds to make them this model citizen you seemingly crave?

What makes it seem even more crazy is the effects of this are so drawn out and non-garunteed i dont understand why you would entertain doing it. when the 'positive' effect of your expermient ever occur you would be old and senile if not outright dead.

I suppose its just a matter of diffrent perspective but to me yours is so abhorrent to my sensibilities i view you a danger to society and a minus on mankind.

Again, no offense im sure your great in alot of ways but i wish i never knew someone could think like that about this matter.

>>2576904
>to essentially expoit childrens minds to make them this model citizen you seemingly crave
The entire point of having schools is to give citizens the intellectual means to be good citizens.

>. when the 'positive' effect of your expermient ever occur you would be old and senile if not outright dead.
Doing what one perceives to be right isn't limited to things one perceives to be immediately beneficial to oneself. However, even ignoring that, some people find joy in having planted the seeds, even if they know that they will never see the mighty oak tree in its full form.

>>2576718
Fuck off with that bullshit. Nationalism is nothing more than an administrative body enforcing its jurisdiction on a specific territorial expanse. It is fundamentally apolitical (in the partisan sense), it's just a model of governance.

Now there are very good reasons why that model is successful and/or desirable but don't project your pseudo-ethnocentric views on something it doesn't belong with. You fascist fuckers have ruined the name of nationalism for everyone else

>>2576940
Not him, but you're confusing terms here tbqh. Nationalism is an ideology that specifically wants to use state power to defend it's sovereignity and cultural identity.

Nationalism isn't just simply the concept of states existing.

File: 1471962619445.jpg (1MB, 2057x2725px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2057x2725px

>>2576933

Well first a compliment for you.
I too perscribe to the notion of doing deeds for the pleasure that it will make future generations better off but not for some divine sense.

However how you and i deliver that gift must be polar opposite. In fact my way of doing things probably disgusts you the same way i feel disgust for your explanation.

The seeds your planting, to my mind, are nothing but worms and the 'mighty oak Tree' will be withered and spontaneously combust.

Are you a teacher or an aspiring teacher? If you are im horrified but i want to know more. Why do you think this stance is correct? do you think future generations will thank you and your ilk for such ideas? I see it as disastrous and already an element of this thinking has been around since the 60's in accademia and look at the long term issues it is making, with it now coming to a-head.


>>2576940
Stick with your civic nationalism until your ready for the big boy table, lovie. dont forget, the ethno-nationalist is part of your group and forever will be so deal with it.

>>2576940
>You fascist fuckers have ruined the name of nationalism for everyone else

Muh civic identity. I'm sure one day it will work champ. I'm sure those millions of sub saharans in France, maghrebis, turks in Holland and Germany etc are going to wake up at some point in the indeterminate future and consider themselves wholly French/Dutch/German. Any day now right? Just a little bit of tinkering with the old social engineering is all it needs.

Muh integration. Never mind that third gen pakis are more are more radical than their grandparents.

>>2576874
> disadvantaged

Agreed. All we need is the right amount of tinkering with the social engineering and they'll all be good Europeans in no time.

For how long are you going to keep going down this path of failed policies? Until whites are ten percent of the population?

The failure of maghrebis to compete in modern economies is not the fault of the French people.

>>2576224
>Warring states were literally just competing factions who still all identified as part of hua.
Hua was a civilizational identity of ruling class not the populace.

Chu,Wu,Yue never considered themselves Hua while the Qin abadoned the identity after Shang Yang's reforms.

>and if it was (e.g. Tang) it was Chinese vs. Outsiders.
You do realize that a unified Han identity only came to be during the Ming dynasty?

Southern dynasties would metaphorically refer to themselves as Zhongguo but they were never considered Chinese by the northern courts.

>>2577013
How do you explain the existence of anti miscegenation laws in Guangdong during the tang dynasty you mug? And what northern dynasties are you referring to?

>>2576904
Again, you make sense. I am theorizing about this. In no way should this become anything other as long as it still can be critized. I applaud that, for that is the methode within social science.

They dangers you point out, the evil in it is real. And at this point the discussion dies a bit. In no way can I make you hear my voice, intonation, gestures all that stuff. So that you see my intentions are real and not mad as they sound.

That we don't understand eachother is partial that, partially culture, up-bringing you name it.
In no way do I want to exploit minds or what ever. It is an answer to nothing, for I don't have any answers.

The trouble is indeed that heart and being can't truelly be put in words. I don't wanna force anything on anybody. They only thing I kinda force is maybe discussion but we lost that now :P. It can be endless and a pain in the ass and frustrating.

I wanted to start a discussion, but did so on the wrong medium. I overtheorized and did what I sometimes critize others to do as well. To go to far forward. The effects are mos def non garanteed, I am not claiming that things will work out in a certain way. Unpredictability is given.

Now, in potential I could be a danger to society and my perspective is def farfatched, weird, unorthodox, unconventional, biased, wrong whatever.

But it has a foundation (practical sense, not all trutchclaiming religous sense), it crumbles every day and has to rebuild. Never ending. You're critic crumble mine today. It is good, it is my mirror.

I regret that it has come to a point that you find me dangerous. I don't regret that via me you have been introduced to a different perspective.

This was a fun exploration of the mind, again sorry if it ruined your day. I bet I didn't and hope you hear my nuance, even in absent of intonation.

>>2576940

Nothing about what he said was fascist. Not that there's anything wrong with fascism. What he described is the true meaning of progressivism: each generation becoming demonstrably better than the prior generation incrementally. That's what progress is, not fag parades and anti islamophobia bills.

>>2576974
>Nationalism is an ideology that specifically wants to use state power to defend it's sovereignity and cultural identity
So like every single state out there? The entire world operates on a nationalistic basis, regardless whether they are socialist, capitalist, liberal, conservative and everything aside and between.

And the central tenet of nationalism is the right to self-governance - a body which enforces its jurisdiction on a set people & space. You have so many strands of nationalism, left-leaning and right-leaning. Ultimately the goal is to preserve the people's ability to self-govern and there are many ways you can go about it. It usually tends to split in its various brands over what constitutes a citizen, but to limit your conception of nationalism to "muh race" or "muh culture" is babby tier

>>2577067
>the people

It's an irrelevant term if the people is some disparate collection of ethnicities who have very little in common beyond language. That's not "a people", it's a collection of different people nominally under a single government.

>>2577033
>How do you explain the existence of anti miscegenation laws in Guangdong during the tang dynasty you mug?
Southern Chinese from Guangdong weren't viewed as the same ethnicity during the Tang.

There was a reason why the Yuan chose to lump Koreans,Jurchens and Khitans with the northern Han.

>And what northern dynasties are you referring to?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_and_Southern_dynasties

Other than the Eastern Jin the later dynasties were founded by local men that identified with a "Chu" identity.

>>2577056
>each generation becoming demonstrably better than the prior generation incrementally. That's what progress is, not fag parades and anti islamophobia bills.
What if someone values "fag parades" and "islamophobia bills", and wants to introduce them to create a better generation? To him, a generation that introduces those in absence of other changes is demonstrably better than the preceding generation, wouldn't that make him progressive?

I don't think there's a disagreement of definitions. There's just a disagreement of values.

>>2575622

Yes. Because it makes no sense. Go back far enough and nobody has any ties to said land. Let's say you are a English nationalist. Go back enough generations and you get into a sorites paradox. Go back one generation. Do they have ties to that land? And another and another until you have people just arriving there. At what point do you stop and say "this is where my ancestors are from?" Because you can go all the way back to the beginning to the common ancestor for all people.

So national and racial identity is stupid since you get into a sorites pararox. Ya can always go one generation back from whatever arbitrary line you draw and it's impossible to justify why you stopped at that point in your ancestral line.

>>2577067
>And the central tenet of nationalism is the right to self-governance - a body which enforces its jurisdiction on a set people & space.
Sounds much more like etatism than nationalism to me.

>>2575726
>people in poor, uncivilized countries continue to value something, therefore it's good
Not the best argument, friendo.

>>2577081
>Southern Chinese from Guangdong weren't viewed as the same ethnicity during the Tang

This doesn't address my question. The distinction the tang governor made was between 华夏 people and 南粤 people and other assorted 黑皮肤的男人. If there was no concept of racial identity and it was just a "ANYONE CUD BCOM CHINESE JUST LIKE AMERICA XDDDD" the why the explicitly racial language?

File: 1489507841138.jpg (10KB, 221x255px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 221x255px

>>2576985
>>2576995
>imblying it isn't fascism which sits at the little boy's table
Literally every single developed state employs civic nationalism, or liberal nationalism as others call it, as its model for governance and definition of citizenry.

What have you got to look up to? 12 years in the 30s and 40s where their leaders went full retard before getting btfo? 40 years of stagnation in spain? Top kek you larpers are deluded beyond reason

>>2577103
>Japan, Korea, Singapore, Taiwan
>poor and uncivilised

I guess if your metric for civilization is having urban centers that have endemic criminality that the government refuses to deal with and third world infrastructure then yeah, those places are uncivilised.

Nice racism though bro.

>those people create inferior countries that's why we want to allow so many of them into our own that we become minorities in a hundred years

Good logic too.

>>2577109
>every developed state

You mean every western state. Developed Pacific Asia sure as fuck doesn't. And what do you mean by "liberal nationalism"? There's zero quality control for who is given French or British passports these days. It's just a matter of spending the requisite amount of time required in a country. Hell in France they don't even require that.

And what's the one unifying thing they all have in common? They're all declining in influence compared to the rest of the world.

>>2577091
Those aren't objective standards like intelligence, health, criminality etc. They are unhinged virtue signalling cluster points. Unless you believe a civilization can survive on patting itself on the back for its perceived tolerance alone in perpetuity.

>>2577102
>etatism
from the french etat which means state. So statism is what you mean. But statism is generally incompatible with liberalism whereas nationalism is. Being concerned with self determination =/= bein concerned with state control over the population

>>2577104
>This doesn't address my question. The distinction the tang governor made was between 华夏 people and 南粤 people and other assorted 黑皮肤的男人.
華 was a Confucian civilizational identity that wasn't restricted to the Chinese ie Koreans and Vietnamese.

Cantonese were culturally 華 but not 漢.

Show me a pre Ming source that Southern Chinese were considered the same as Northern Chinese.

>>2577152
>But statism is generally incompatible with liberalism whereas nationalism is

lolno, liberalism literally needs the state.

>>2577161
This. I'm no lolberg but liberalism in its current formulation absolutely needs the state. Look at the way racism is natural even in babies whereas anti racism is something that needs to be brainwashed into someone from birth through state schooling and even then it's hold is tenuous.

>>2577137
>There's zero quality control for who is given French or British passports these days
If the bar has been lowered, it is the fault of the elected who dropped the ball. Not the model itself. And despite bad recent leadership, those countries are still the most prosperous with the largest economies. Even with both the current migrant and terrorism crisis, nowhere are these countries actually collapsing, you've just drank the /pol/ koolaid too much.

>>2577179
Liberalism in any formulation needs the State. How else are you going to arbitrate people's rights and obligations? You need courts for that, courts that are outside of the market system so there is no conflict of interest.

>>2577188
Japan is the most advanced capital intensive manufacturing nation on earth mate. Not Britain or France lol. Or even Germany.

>>2577152
>from the french etat which means state. So statism is what you mean.
I like the term "etatism" much more, and it's the term commonly used in my country (t. not even French). "Statism" always confuses me, because when I see the term, I first want to pronounce the Latin root in Latin, but then realize that it's just English and would have to switch over to the English pronounciation, which I also find to sound ugly for this term.

>>2577081
>Southern Chinese from Guangdong weren't viewed as the same ethnicity during the Tang.

Can you provide some primary source evidence for this?

My girlfriend says 汉 & 华 were and are used more or less interchangeably.

>>2575764
Yes, but the instinct for tribalism is still there, so you'll just find other ways to divide people up and assign hierarchies.

Until CRISPR fucks everything up, it's just what people do. It's the instinct that makes civilization possible to begin with.

>>2577161
stop being obtious. None of this contradicts what I said. The presence of the state is required for nearly every political ideology out there, from minarchism and lolbertarianism to full blown state communism or fascism.

The argument of degrees matter here when it comes to state involvement. Etatism is literally authoritarian by intent, nationalism isn't. Drawing false equivalencies is not helping your case.

>>2577188
>nowhere are these countries actually collapsing

Neither is Brazil.

Is this your new litmus test for the success of a country, that they're not actually collapsing?

It's more about the model of government and more specifically the ideology that guides everyone in it that could produce leaders who think allowing millions upon millions of random predominantly male MENAs with no marketable skills into your nation permanently is a good idea.

It's decisions such as that that have led to the loss of liberal democracy's brand value over the past 30 or so years - nobody outside of the west is interested in it anymore.

>>2577223
>The presence of the state is required for nearly every political ideology out there

Wrong. Conservative values in the perennial sense can subsist even without a state: There's a reason forced race-blindness, forced integration, feminism etc need the state - these things could simply not survive without it.

>>2577188
>If the bar has been lowered

And it hasn't just lowered, it has been altogether done away with. In France you don't even need to satisfy the condition of four consecutive years in the country before citizenship anymore. You can just get a family reunification visa because cousin abdul is over there claiming bennies and then go back to Algeria for four years and THEN claim French citizenship.

>Not the model itself.

It absolutely is the fault of the model/ideology. Liberalism's two axiomatic foundational "truths" are equality as moral good and individual liberty as moral good. The end result of adopting these axioms is where we are now.

>>2577223
>Etatism is literally authoritarian by intent, nationalism isn't.

No, it's not. Nationalism is what's authoritarian, not simple statism, though this depends wholly on your own perspective, because anarchists believe monopolizing violence is by definition authoritarian.

>>2577238
In fact now that I come to think of it, non-kinship based group identities simply cannot come into being in the first place without a state actually manufacturing them.

Civic identities are a thousand times more artificial than virtually all putative racial identities.

>>2577238
Are you some sort of conservative primitivist? Top kek.

Even the antiquity civilizations had courts of laws, judges, assemblies, administrative bodies and governance was needed to address all maners of issues for benefit of the state. The concept of "state"/polis/natio was developed later sure, BUT the institutions which the state governs predate it. What we call allegiance to the state was allegiance to the "crown" then.

File: 1488333739082.jpg (351KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

351KB, 1000x1000px

>>2577250
It really is. Look up the definition of etatism, then the one ablut nationalism. One is preoccupied about self-determination by its people, the other is simply bothered about prolonging its existence for the sake of existing through state power. You fell for the "nationalism is literally hitler" meme.

>>2577221
>Can you provide some primary source evidence for this?
Not a primary source but the authors quote historical texts.

Han was originally a hydronym that became a dynastonym. It wasn't used in an ethnic sense until non Sinitic speakers used it for their subjects.

http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/elliott/files/critical_han_studies_ch8_elliott.pdf
http://scholarbank.nus.sg/bitstream/handle/10635/13104/Yang%20Shao-yun%20-%20amended%20MA%20thesis.pdf?sequence=1

>My girlfriend says 汉 & 华 were and are used more or less interchangeably.
Most Chinese don't understand that 華,漢 and 中國 changed over time.

>>2575738
Arabs are mongrelcucks they do not count.

>>2577230
Have you ever been to europe? You see /pol/ memes and think it's real life happening everywhere, all of the time. I fully admit there is a crisis at the moment in europe but it has survived worse and it will survive this one too. It always amuses me that it's the fascist larpers who profess the strength of european culture who always seem to believe it's gonna collapse at any point.

File: the_world_god_only_knows_001.jpg (179KB, 720x720px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 720x720px

>>2577303
>Han was originally a hydronym
I wish the term "fluxonym" was used. It's both even cooler and more precise.

>>2577273
This is a matter of semantics. The selection of magistrates and affording of them a level of higher status and authority is a state, even if there isn't an attendant bureaucracy to go along with it.

>>2577324
Nigger I live in Europe. I'm a Greek emigre.

>it will survive this one too

You're another Northwestern European moron who has never faced an actual existential threat to your existence so you think Muslims are these nice, cuddly people who are going to become good Germans/French/Brits any day now.

You've never actually lived under their Empires/States or understood just how little non-Muslim lives mean to them. So when they're 50% plus of your population a century from now, you'll see what I mean.

But we're talking past each other at this point. So there's no point in continuing. I will add this though:

>it has survived worse

No it hasn't. It hasn't ever had to face a concerted effort to replace its native population with non-Europeans before. If a King or Feudal lord had ever done with Blair and Merkel and Hollande and co have been doing, they'd have been hung by their balls.

>>2577341
Actually, now that I think about it, it describing that it's a name for a river is added, but that it's something out of water is lost, so it might not actually be more precise, depending on how you weigh the information.

Then again, "rivers" not made out of water are rather rare.

File: 1489316036111.jpg (138KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 600x450px

>>2577347
>it's semantics
then don't bring up the point of state being not required for a society to function, then get btfo when you cant provide concrete examples of what you mean apart from meme ideologies.

>"you're just another cuck who loves muslim BBC" /pol/ack rant
No I don't particularly like muslims failing to integrate, nor do I feel islam is particularly compatible with europe which is why I swing more towards civic nationalism than classical liberalism. But most of this can be addressed by enforcing controlled migration and pushing assimilation policies until admixture does its job and the majority of migrants have been swallowed up by the 4th or so generation. Neoliberals sacrificed social cohesion for cheap labour, that was a mistake that will take some time to fix. But it's not the end.

>IT IS THE END!!!1!1!!
Top kek, ethnonationalist fatalism at its finest

of course not, you are not living in x country, you live in y country, and the needs, wants, and locality of y country is what is important in your life, no x country

>>2577401
>failing to integrate

You act like this is some sort of failure of the mechanics of your social engineering policy when the reality is it's just the normal result of letting millions of aliens settle in your country in a very short space of time.

>that was a mistake that will take some time to fix

It isn't going to get fixed I'm afraid. Any attempt to paradigm shift Europe's generally permissive attitude to immigration is absolutely verboten and unacceptable to the elite, and they'll castigate you as a nazi even if your politics are otherwise liberal.

>until admixture does its job and the majority of migrants have been swallowed up by the 4th or so generation

Ah I see, so you believe that Europe should just turn black/brown like Brazil. Gotcha.

>>2576087
>If everyone becomes one culture te world would get boring as fuck.
It already is getting there thanks to European imperialism chimping out on the world. It really killed local cultures everywhere. I find it ironic now that it is happening to them they find it 'problematic'.

>>2577420
>Ah I see, so you believe that Europe should just turn black/brown like Brazil. Gotcha.

On a related note. How does this work if the net inflows are allowed to keep coming in in such large numbers as they have been for the past 30 years?

All it means is that Europeans basically become part/wholly African/Middle Eastern and that, alongside this, increasing numbers of Africans and Middle Easterners arrive from the third world on a yearly basis anyway.

End result being it's a pattern of racial replacement. Not absorption. You don't just absorb tens/hundreds of millions of aliens when they're constantly producing surplus populations that your own governments actively encourage to come settle.

>>2577423
It's yet another

>Eurocentrism is ok so long as it focuses on perceived crimes

Argument.

That makes what, about two thousand on /his/ alone?

>>2577420
>social engineering
you realise white genocide is a meme right? immigrants stop shitting kids once their wealth increases, that's literally backed by 1000s of economic and social studies on the topic..Also Europe is due for a "white baby boom" real fucking soon as the main bulk of the new generation is expected to have its first borns soon. It will be at the required 2.0 ratio to maintain the population (except germany which will reach 1.7 and is still lacking behind for some reason). Im foneposting atm from work and don't have the fertility/age group eu study link but I will bump thread with it when I get bk home.

It can't be a genocide if the native population is still thriving and the majority.

>admixture is bad
nigger you're mediterranean, you're the poster child of admixture. Countries that are 80-90+% (((white))) can perfectly absorb a bulk of migrants without turning (((brown))). The problem isn't the existence of migrants, it's the continuous flow of migrants.

Your solution is deporting and gassing all the foreigners and I don't want to see the West btfo because it fell for the natsoc meme again. We have china at our heels, we can't afford bullshit like this right now.

>>2576554
Yours is a meme county, just defined as a middle ground. You are Uruguayans just because you are not Argentines or Brazilians

national identity is fabricated, it didn't exist 500 years ago and it's a good thing it's dissapearing again

File: 1489072842271.jpg (46KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 600x450px

>>2577651
>national identity didn't exist 500years ago
Wrong. There has been many attempts to define a "national" culture beforehand, even before nations and nationalities even existed..A good example of that is ancient greece. During the olympiads the applicants had to prove their "greekness" to the hellenodicae (literally meaning "the judges of the greeks) before being allowed to participate. Also herodotus listed his own 4 criteria for common greek identity : common blood, common language, common customs and custom religion. I am certain greeks weren't unique in this aspect either, and that specific example was in full effect as far as 776 BC.

File: 85693465.jpg (87KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 1920x1080px

>>2575622
"""national identity""" is only important to uneducated low IQ blue collar cucks. Once you are educated, you realize national identity is all but a divide and conquer tactic to prevent humans on Earth from uniting. If you can see the bigger picture, if there is ever an alien invasion in the future, we need to put all our differences (race, religion, gender or nationality) aside and unite.

>>2577738
>we r all da same
>believing this is some sort of counter-elite opinion

This is literally what western elites believe.

>>2577738
Is it to actively prevent union or is it because we're still bound by various degrees of skill at dealing with scarcity? Also different cultures & languages are not the result of purposeful division, they're the remnants of early cultures developing separately from each other (courtesy of natural environmental barriers). They have been mixing, evolving, merging and splitting ever since. I really doubt any of it is intentional and mankind is really doing its best with what it has or knows.

Eventually nationalism will seize being relevant but we still aren't there yet. Star trek isn't real life.

>>2577753
>t. low IQ blue collar cuck

Enjoy being on the wrong side of history

>>2577763
*cease, not seize
>tfw been reading too much 20th century russiqn history

>>2577738
>implying our world leaders won't just sell humanity out and let the the Aliens rule us due to their superior firepower

>>2577764
That's not a response to my point:

>you realize national identity is all but a divide and conquer tactic to prevent humans on Earth from uniting.

Who is engineering this? Western elites like Soros believe themselves to be transnational, they do not see borders as real things. So I'm not sure why you're insinuating some sort of elite level conspiracy to keep people divided when in reality the opposite is true.

>wrong side of history

Remind me again what the rising superpower in the world is?

>>2577537
>We have china at our heels,

I have a great idea to compete with a nation of 1.4bn with an average IQ of 105 (at least).

Let's let in mudshits with an average IQ of 80. Let's let in millions upon millions of them and blanda upp with them.

>>2577793
>with an average IQ of 105 (at least).
believing chinese state propaganda statistics
half of china is still rural as fuck, some part were even barely touched by mao's cultural revolution or land reforms. I am fully willing to accept urban chinese are smart but they still have half a population going through their industrial revolution. They aren't this army of "supersmart insectoids" the stereotype leads you to believe.

File: PISA_2012.jpg (108KB, 550x522px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 550x522px

>>2577817
>believing chinese state propaganda statistics

Is PISA state propaganda too?

You people are so full of hubris it's untrue. You'll kiss Muslim and black ass until the cows come home but when you're faced with a real adversary you stick your fingers in your ear and pretend its not happening.

>I am fully willing to accept urban chinese are smart but they still have half a population going through their industrial revolution.

Welcome to 2000! China's urbanization rate now is 60% - just 20% short of the UK.

>>2577817
Go to China. Their infrastructure makes Germany look second world.

China isn't India. It isn't some meme country. It really is going to dominate the world - Trump's absolutely right about tariffs, and not out of spite, but because we literally will have no industry left if things keep up.

I fear the Chinese because I respect them. I don't fear people like Indians because they're just incompetent loud mouths.

>>2577836
>To fulfill OECD requirements, each country must draw a sample of at least 5,000 students
Golly gee, how could the chinks ever exploit such a thorough system of measurement?

Nevermind the number of times their students get caught cheating when they study abroad or even at home.

http://time.com/4360968/china-gaokao-examination-university-entrance-cheating-jail-prison/

http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2017-02/27/content_28368144.htm

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/03/how-sophisticated-test-scams-from-china-are-making-their-way-into-the-us/474474/

>>2577882
>Golly gee, how could the chinks ever exploit such a thorough system of measurement?

Dude, they've expanded it to include Jiangsu, Beijing, Guangdong and another province - The Chinese still rank 6th in the world.

If you doubt Chinese are smart, just look at the academic attainment rates of just about any Chinese minority anywhere in the entire world. Whether they're 4th/5th generation or FOBs. Are they ALL involved in this conspiracy to game results?

I mean the entire PISA thing is dominated by East Asian countries anyway, why wouldn't you expect the Chinese to also do well?

>>2577899
Of course they aren't dumb, most peoole aren't dumb if properly educated but they still have a way to go to catch up. Their advantage is not "intelligence", it's their numbers.

>>2577925
>most peoole aren't dumb if properly educated

That's where you are wrong:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3182557/

Most people simply aren't capable on an intrinsic level of being in wealth creating professions like patent-creating, highly specialized engineering fields.

This is another area where liberal thinking breaks down. Liberals just think regardless of your innate level of human capital if you through enough cash at teachers and enough tablet computers into a classroom, you'll develop an entire generation of super-engineers.

It doesn't work that way. Civilization is quite literally contingent upon smart people having enough children and raising them in a good environment to be productive, well adjusted people.

That's why conservative values, which promote fecundity and strong, large extended families ALWAYS WIN.

>>2577965
Maybe true, but there are other talents than engineering. In holland its called leftish hobbies to ridicul it, but cultural aspect of society (arts) is as valuable as other aspects.

>>2577115
stupid weeaboo

>>2576236
And what country do you reside? Is your culture in place? Does it not strive to emulate the US because we have a system and cultural ideal that works? The transparency which makes our follies so apparent and easy for people to try to harp on also make the important ones easier to address.