I had a difficult day at work so I’m in the mood for a fight. On second thought, I’ll settle for a debate and today’s victim will be Robert Lindsay. Last month he published a post called “More Nonsense About ‘White Genocide‘”. In a nutshell, his arguments are that:
1) Whites will not become extinct because not all of them will intermarry with the non-whites multitudes that are brought to their shores.
2) “No one cares much about genetic “extinction” of various “pure” ethnic groups via voluntary intermarriage. Only lunatics like you guys. Races are not stable entities. They are changing all the time. It’s been that way all down through time.”
3) “There have been efforts to “breed out” various “pure” races in the past via flooding with immigration and encouraging intermarriage, but no one cares much about it, except that it had a racist ideology. See the “Whitening” project in Brazil for instance.”
My response, henceforth directed toward Mr. Lindsay, is that nobody, not even the most extreme pro-white activist, can control whom his descendants will breed with over time. He can have a powerful influence upon his children and maybe even upon his grandchildren but, sooner or later, he will die and his passion and influence will wane. The only way to prevent the dilution of a population is for that population to have its own territory or, at least, its own community. It must have its own schools, businesses, institutions and ideology*. Jews and the Parsi (diaspora Persians in India) are good examples. As it stands, governments prohibit whites from having their own schools; they are forced to allow their children to mix with other races (either explicitly or through financial pressure). Businesses are not allowed to be strictly white and, as a practical matter, neither are most institutions.
It is not necessary for all whites to intermarry in one or two generations; under the above circumstances, all whites will eventually intermarry and the indigenous peoples of Europe will be no more.
It is not necessary to believe that whites are a pure race in order to recognize the validity of their existence. Is there any proof that the Tasmanians were a “pure race”? I doubt it – and yet many people grieve over their extinction. I have already discussed the definition of “white” elsewhere. Should Native American tribes allow anybody to join them, whether or not they have any Native American blood? Many would say “no”. If this were the case, those tribes would cease being tribes; instead, they would be religions, ideologies, social clubs or cults.
As for “voluntary intermarriage”. One could argue that each individual case of miscegenation is “voluntary” but, taken as a whole, the vast conspiracy of propaganda and intense pressure (from birth to grave) for white girls and women to date blacks – and, to a lesser extent, for Asian girls and women to date whites – greatly reduces the “voluntary” element here. “Grooming” would be a better word. White girls are groomed to date blacks and this is no more voluntary than the grooming of girls to be prostitutes or house slaves. The results of conditioning from a tender age are not “voluntary”. The weak-minded of each generation will succumb. The parents did not send their children to mixed schools voluntarily either. Witness the opposition to desegregation in the South. Their children were mixed at the point of a gun.
As for no one caring about it, on the face of it, this is clearly false. Many people do care about it. I care about it and so do most readers of this blog. A recent survey revealed that nearly half of Mississippi Republicans would want miscegenation to be illegal. One would assume that they care about it. Armand Leroi cares about the survival of the negritos. In any event, even if it were true that “no one” cared about it, this does not mean that we should not care about it. Our priorities and opinions should not be subject to majority rule. You, of all people Mr. Lindsay, should appreciate this. After all, “no one” believes that Bigfoot exists – and yet you do. And I would never try to debate your Bigfoot claims with such an argument.
You are right that races are not stable entities. They ebb and flow and change all the time – but we ask that government allow nature to take its own course in this matter. Species also come and go. They become extinct all the time, even without the help of humans. And yet we consider the eradication of a species (even subspecies such as the Spotted Owl) to be a great crime. I have already contrasted the concern over a race of ducks with the lack of concern over races of men.
You claim that no one cares about efforts to swamp “pure” races in the past with immigrants in order to eradicate them “except that it had a racist ideology”. I would say that current policies toward traditionally white nations are based upon “racist ideologies”. We need not guess the intentions of those in power toward the white race; they have been quite vocal about their disdain toward it. The MSM is vocal about it. All Western institutions, that hold any measure of clout, are openly anti-white. They make no secret about it. What they want is a world either without whites at all, or one in which whites hold no power – even over their own destiny. You read Amren so surely you are aware of this.
As the evil plans of those in power become ever more obvious, more and more people do care about it.
*Though whites do not share a common ideology, they can incorporate a will to survive as a race within their various ideologies.