The problem seems to be that the 'right' dislikes immigration

Liberals are literally none of those things, they have endless means of rationalising why they don't have to be.

Much like how religious texts say "enemies aren't human", so "be kind to humans" wouldn't cover enemies but it sounds nice to the easily fooled.

Next tactic is saying "no u". You do a lot of that.

>>137938849
no
you're a retard

>>137938849
Wrong you nigger. I dislike immigration because immigrants are not my kin and their mass migration here endangers my people's demographic position in our own homeland. Non-Finns are not my kin and their presence here is an existential threat to the future of my people.

>>137938849

These "liberal" values are classic liberalism values, aka modern libertarian values.

sage this thread

>>137938849
The mainstream is all based on Orwellian double thinking

It hates White traditionalists

It venerates Brown traditionalists

There's no logic and rationale in that other than catering to the basic emotions of guilt and shame

>>137940334
That's fair, you're entitled to your opinion. Different people have different definitions of kinship. You only see other ethnic finns as your kins. I see all humans as my kin regardless of race. So I totally get where you're coming from. If an alien race invaded Earth then I would see that as being an existential threat in the same way as you see immigration.
A large part of the of the 'right' vote today is racially-based thinking like yours.

>>137938849
those are classical liberal values
modern liberals hate all of those
>individualism
modern liberals want safe space for all trannies, others for all niggers, etc
they value the groups more than the individuals they're made of

>rationalism
they hate science when it disagrees with them (which it very often does)

>freedom
they want to ban each and errything, and mandate people act in a particular way
they actually hate freedom

>responsibility
they want such things as universal healthcare, which makes others vouch for you
where's the responsibility in that?

>justice
they don't believe in justice (ie compensating victims for their loss)
that's not justice when they want reparations for nogs: current nogs didn't suffer from slavery, there are no victims anymore, so there's no crime anymore

what they believe in is moral hegemony
they tell who's good, and who's bad, without any relation to any actual loss to anyone
that's the antithesis of justice

>tolerance
you can only tolerate that which bothers you
else, it's either complacency or indifference
what they want is for people to even stop being bothered
which frankly is quite intolerant of them

>>137941127
> I see all humans as my kin regardless of race
And that makes you a deluded moron who will be taken advantage of and subjugated by more tribalistic people who favor their own kin above you. I recognize the inherently tribal nature of our species and see the rules of the game for what they are, tribal competition for land and resources, just like it has always been. You can keep living in your universalist delusion, blind to the rules of the game, but all it will ensure is that if not you, your descendants will become slaves to foreign masters.

I am willing to kill and die to prevent non-Finns from ever fucking ruling over my people ever again. It is my moral obligation.

>>137941127
I will assume that you are an anglo-australian. If you see the entire world as your kin, what will you do when the world doesn't see you as their kin? If thousands, nay hundreds of thousands of X nationality would start pouring into Australia with the belief that people of anglo-ancestry are not their kin, what will you do? If these new Australians start attacking anglo-bakground Australians since they are not their kin (to them) what will you do? Where do you draw the line, if you yourself get in danger because of the new arrivals are they still your kin?

>>137941917
>they value the groups more than the individuals they're made of
Yeah I agree with you that we should move towards seeing people as individuals with personal rights and responsibilities rather than as members of distinct groups

>they hate science when it disagrees with them
This can be a can of worms if the subject matter is sensitive. Suppose a scientific study finds that black people achieve lower maths scores than whites. How should we interpret this result? How should that change policy? Very sensitive topic with a lot of possible negative consequences.

>they actually hate freedom
Then that person isn't very liberal

>they want such things as universal healthcare, which makes others vouch for you
If the state can provide healthcare to citizens who can't afford it then it should because it would lead to greater individual health. Health is liberating.

>>137939404
>Liberals are literally none of those things, they have endless means of rationalising why they don't have to be.
That first post could have ended the thread right there.
OP's list of liberal values sounds suh-weet! If only liberals followed them!

>>137943261
>Suppose a scientific study finds that black people achieve lower maths scores than whites. How should we interpret this result? How should that change policy?
simple: stop forbidding people from telling a dumb nigger is a dumb nigger
feelings are just ideas, and ideas do not exist, by definition
which implies believing feelings can be hurt is dimwitted (particularly when people just say an obvious truth)

>Then that person isn't very liberal
modern liberals are not liberals
at all

>If the state can provide healthcare to citizens who can't afford it
stop right there.
the state itself can't
to do so, the state must steal wealth from other people, no state itself having ever created half a dime in wealth

you can belive there's no wrong in that (I for one don't)
just don't come and try to pretend you care about people's liberty when you do so
because taking hard earned money from people without their consent shits on their very lives (seeing as they spent part of their lives to earn that money)
it exactly amounts to forced labour
(NB: and I tell you that myself being heavily handicapped by thalamic pain syndrome)

>>137942685
>>137943160
I'm sure the two of you are good people and mean well. For me, the similarities between humans of different races are just too much more than the differences. I don't see how we can't all live in a win-win scenario.

>>137944505
Yeah I would agree with most of your post.
You're making a lot of sense.
Universal healthcare is a very thorny subject.
Only the most wealthiest nation states can afford universal healthcare. Most nations simply can't raise enough taxes to fund it. It is definitely a privilege and not a right.

>>137945529
There are plenty of differences, much of the study on this matter has been (((hidden))) however. It's quite surprising that humans can breed with each other globally. But then again, IIRC wolves and dogs can create non-retarded offspring together as well.

>>137945529
>>137946768
Also, you will only find these liberal ideas that you adore in western countries. All other nations are either authotarian or in complete anarchy. It's something worth considering.