Things White Nationalist Don't Know About Crime in Communities

I agree. Each European ethnicity should have its own form of nationalism for its own nation. However, right now the prevailing view in the Western world is that white ethnicities should not have any kind of nationalism. White Westerners are being told to open their borders to the entire world and then allow their population and culture to die out. So if this fight for survival affects all Europeans, shouldn't all Europeans work together? Germans should condemn the notion that Norway should lose its population and culture, and Norwegians should do the same for Germany. Both countries should respect and fight for the other country's survival.

Yes, whenever we went to war, it was to defend our own country. In the Battle of Vienna, the Germans were fighting for the Holy Roman Empire, the Poles and the Lithuanians were fighting for Poland-Lithuania, and the Hungarians were fighting for Hungary.
But because all three of those countries were under attack, the Germans, Poles, Lithuanians, and Hungarians all did the smart thing. They worked together to fight off the common enemies.

Unfortunately, white unity was hard to achieve when the Jews were running the Soviet Union.
Though, in all fairness, the Nazis did want to invade Russia, and Stalin did want to invade all of Europe even without the Jews in his ear.
The truth is, yes, white unity has not been a thing throughout history. European countries usually only teamed up when there was a common enemy. But like I said before, there is a common enemy now.

Yet most of those Europeans, whether Christian or Atheist, believe in secular government and religious freedom. This is a part of Western Civilization.
The many cultures of Europe, while different, are all part of Western Civilization. Much like how the cultures of Latin America are different, but still belong to a distinct Spanish-speaking culture. Same goes for the cultures of Sub-Sahara Africa.

From the time I spent in Europe, it seems more like the "hate" between countries is more of a brotherly rivalry kind of thing. Austrians, Swiss-Germans, and Southern Germans all say they hate the "Prussians," whom they consider all of the Germans above the Weißwurstäquator to be. Yet they all have friends from Northern and Central Germany, they all love vacationing near the Rhine and the North Sea, and they all love Rammstein. It was the same in Scandinavia and the UK. Scots will jokingly complain about the English, then throw their arms around an English guy's neck and be like "Ah, this guy! He's crazy, but he's alright!"

Most ideologies see oppressed and oppressors. That's kind of just how the world works.
No, it's nationalist. We are united as allies, but we all deserve our own separate nations.
Neither White Nationalism nor Marxism is materialistic. You're thinking of Capitalism and Consumerism.

Then try to answer my question.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/white-ethnomasochism.499959/

 

To be fair, whites have only themselves to blame for the current situation.

Yeah, of course. There are countless of examples like this, but this really has nothing to do with "white nationalism". Uniting people based on haplogroups does not work.

You mean "In my country there is problem and that problem is the Jew"?

They all despise each other. Try telling Navajo and Cherokee they should unite under "Amerindian Nationalism" based on their DNA or Azande and Nuer to unite under "Negroid Nationalism" and they would most likely kill you.

You should look into what "materialism" means and then re-read the Wikipedia article on Marxism.

I do not care about your friggen boogeyman.

 

Yes, you don't think any of the problems at all are caused by absentee father's?

 

The US was made by and for whites since the immigration act in 1790 until 1965. If oppression causes long term societal problems, then Japanese Americans would have life achievement statistics lower than white Americans.

 

______

Aah, that was then, this is now... As a veteran, I applaud his heroism and service, no matter what he did honorably in the past it does not give the Honorable Charles Rangel the license to do the unethical things he's done in his life after.

 

They still don't. Who controls Chicago, New York City, Los Angeles, or Compton?

 

Not so in "Blue Cities". Do you really think that Rahm Emanuel won the last election without some political skullduggery?

 

Uh....when were the japanese slaves?

 

I don't know but manipulation can only get you so far. The mayor of Chicago represents a lot of people. If it is a blue city, then he was just the chosen one. Any democrat with a haircut would have done the same job. The people just had to put their stamp of approval on the message. The person speaking doesn't really matter. They vote for the other guy or they vote for a blue guy.

 

Whitey brought the Coon to US so if there is any problem with Coons living in US, it is whitey's fault.

 

Really? In 1964 murder was not one of the leading causes of death for young black youth, it is today. You have a warped sense of improvement...

 

Blacks commit 50% of the murder. But the amount of murders in America are not that high. So this really means the per capita murder for blacks, while higher than whites, is still pretty low. Murder does not have anything to do with incarceration rates, which is mostly due to drug abuse or drug distribution. The black prison population is only about 10% violent crimes with the rest being non-violent drug offenses. For the general prison population murder is only 3.7% of all of the inmates. The rest is largely drug offenses. Which shouldn't be illegal to begin with. Even robbery is a miniscule 3.2%.

Murder is really not all that common among any race. So the stats are misleading, but once taken into account, the differentiation between whites and blacks in terms of murder isn't significant.