/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11587017]

Anyone read this? Is he right?

[Anonymous No.11587019]

brukk of yu bakk

[Anonymous No.11587023]

>>11587017
it's ok, it's melodramatic and longwinded at times(it's written by a homo) but it gets the point across- Europe is essentially being invaded against the will of its occupants according to the design of an international bureaucracy centred in Brussels

anybody who needed to be told this in 2017 is hopelessly behind the times

[Anonymous No.11587037]

>>11587023
>Europe is essentially being invaded against the will of its occupants according to the design of an international bureaucracy centred in Brussels

Is this supposed to be a bad thing?

[Anonymous No.11587040]

>>11587017
What do you mean is he right? Yes, the documentation is factual. He covers the impact of immigration starting with the late 60s and how it got gradually worse, with Blairite policies, later culminating in Merkel lunacy (by her own admission). The tone is slightly apocalyptic and melodramatic at times, but yes, cynical niggers let too many people in and there are/will continue to be immense costs because of it. What's even more worrying is that the children of 70s and 80s (muslim) immigrants now hate their host-countries and find an identity ina sort of Putinist Islam in a way that their parents never did.

[Anonymous No.11587042]

>>11587037
if i cared about the people of Europe i would consider this a pretty bad thing but I dont give a shit about them

[Anonymous No.11587048]

>>11587040
>the children of 70s and 80s (muslim) immigrants now hate their host-countries and find an identity ina sort of Putinist Islam in a way that their parents never did

Good

[Anonymous No.11587056]

>>11587042
should also mention that it's not going to be Europe that suffers in the end, as in white Europeans. Once they get pushed into a tight enough corner the snownigger will reemerge and do what it was doing for millenia before this bizarre peaceful period.

white people are strikingly good at organized warfare and when they go tribal they are as bloodthirsty as any other people on earth

but the people now inhabiting Europe have nothing to do with those that made Europe great, and their being slowly raped by MENA and SSA is irrelevant

[Anonymous No.11587381]

>>11587037
I'd say it is pretty bad even by the standards of the pro-immigrant side, essentially they're living in denial.
The best rational argument they can come up with is "muh pensions", but that argument itself is very short sighted. The other, more "humanistic" arguments are even worse and full of spooks, to use Stirner's language.

Each of the pro-immigrant arguments could easily be scrutinized on its own and even more so in combination, because they end up contradicting each other.
This is partly what Murray does in this book.

[Anonymous No.11587403]

>>11587017

I read it, he is right. He covers 'edgy' sources like Camp of the Saints in a normie-friendly way

[Anonymous No.11587409]

>>11587017
>Anyone read this?
I listened to the audiobook some time ago, it was pretty alright from what I remember. Not really groundbreaking stuff but an interesting investigation into immigration and a (successful or not, judge for yourself) refutation of common pro immigration arguments.

>Is he right?
If the question is whether I agree with him, then mostly yes.

[Anonymous No.11587429]

anyone have a pdf?

[Anonymous No.11587430]

>>11587023
>against the will of its occupants
Wrong. Pro immigration parties have consistently won elections across Europe. Most people are scared of foreigners and recognise immigration is the best thing to happen to Europe in decades. Much as /pol/ wishes it, there will be no race war, because everybody gets along

[Anonymous No.11587463]

>>11587430
Wrong

[Anonymous No.11587485]

>>11587429

https://archive.org/details/TheStrangeDeathOfEuropeImmigrationDouglasMurray

[Anonymous No.11587498]

>>11587430
>Wrong. Pro immigration parties have consistently won elections across Europe. Mo
but if you poll people they dont want immigration. the obvious conclusion being the electoral class doesnt care about what the people think

as for everyone getting lmao, go to marseille and see what its like

[Anonymous No.11587523]

>>11587485
thanks

[Anonymous No.11587531]

>>11587430
Uhm, no?
Do you have any evidence for that claim.
Pre refugee crisis, in 2014 this is what Europeanns thought about migration:
http://www.pewglobal.org/2014/05/12/chapter-3-most-support-limiting-immigration/

And Germans have only become more anti migration: https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/289427/umfrage/umfrage-zu-einer-begrenzung-der-zuwanderung-nach-deutschland/
And the people wanting to limit "Zuwanderung", Immigration, are now a majority although not by much.
And with the consistent rise of the AfD in polls it is hard to argue that the trend will reverse soon.

Many people also are very worried about the current state of Migration: https://www.politico.eu/article/we-got-too-many-migrants-survey-europe-migration/amp/

>Pro immigration parties
Such as?
Even the voters of the German CDU are by the majority against migration.
Italy is obviously strongly anti immigration, see the parties in power.
In Sweden the SD is on the rise.
Any nation where pro migration parties have gained ground in the recent years and anti immigration parties haven't?

>Most people are scared of foreigners
Well yes. That is somewhat true at least acceptance isn't that high: https://news.gallup.com/poll/216377/new-index-shows-least-accepting-countries-migrants.aspx?g_source=link_NEWSV9&g_medium=TOPIC&g_campaign=item_&g_content=New%2520Index%2520Shows%2520Least-%2c%2520Most-Accepting%2520Countries%2520for%2520Migrants

But they have reasons to be worried, 35% of crime in Germany last year was committed by foreigners. BKA PKS Tabelle 62.

>recognise immigration is the best thing to happen to Europe in decades
Evidence?
I couldn't find anything that supports that claim. A large majority is worried about migration, see above.

>Much as /pol/ wishes it, there will be no race war, because everybody gets along
I don't know about a race war, but it doesn't seem like people get along that well judging from the above polls.

I really see little evidence for your claims. Even Germany doesn't have a majority favoring higher or the same levels of migration.
Do you have more then pure speculation?

[Anonymous No.11587555]

>>11587531
>Do you have more then pure speculation?
Election results in every European country, apart from maybe Italy which never has a dominant party anyway. None of the anti immigrant parties have won an election. Show me a single European president or prime minister from an anti immigration party. The right wing surge has utterly failed. UKIP, AFD, SD, FN etc have all failed to win power, and pro immigration parties have beaten them in elections. Election results mean more than polls. Polls would find people in favour of the death penalty, but people won't actually vote for this. People claim they don't like immigration, but when the important decisions are made, they decide otherwise.

[Anonymous No.11587562]

>>11587555
It's because the alternative to what you call "pro-immigration" parties has been right-wing populism of the Putinist kind. But even that has gained power in countries like Hungary and Italy and its rising in popularity all over. As far as neoliberal parties go, Merkel has declared her immigration scheme a failure, Macron stole votes from the retarded Putinist-populist right by acknowledging that immigration needs to be controlled, etc.

[Anonymous No.11587566]

>>11587019
>the Eastern Bloc had the right idea

Fuck this unemployable sack of shit.

[Anonymous No.11587576]

What's the subtext here?

[Anonymous No.11587578]

>>11587555
>Election results in every European country, apart from maybe Italy which never has a dominant party anyway.
But in Germany for example a party who's members are mostly against immigration won the most votes.

>Show me a single European president or prime minister from an anti immigration party.
Technically Merkel.
Her voters are in the majority against immigration, I showed you the data.
Also Obviously Hungary Poland etc. come to mind.

>UKIP, AFD, SD, FN etc have all failed to win power
The AfD is very close to being the second largest German party in current polls?
I don't know what you understand as failure, but that isn't.
In the latest poll SD is the largest swedish party:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_Swedish_general_election,_2018
I don't get how you could call that anything but a complete success?

>Election results mean more than polls.
They are usually fairly accurate at capturing opinions and predicting election results.

>Polls would find people in favour of the death penalty, but people won't actually vote for this.
Because it isn't an important issue for many people I would guess.

>People claim they don't like immigration, but when the important decisions are made, they decide otherwise.
They vote for parties. They don't vote for policy, don't you understand parliamentary democracy?
The people are, as I have demonstrated, against immigration, but they don't get to vote on immigration, they get to vote on a large package, if Merkel is gone it is entirely plausible that an anti immigration politician becomes head of the party.

Again. Where is the evidence for your claims?
Europeans are against immigration, that is what the data shows.

[Anonymous No.11587585]

>>11587037
Don't try and reason with /pol/

[Anonymous No.11587587]

>>11587585
Did you read the book?

[Anonymous No.11587588]

>>11587531
Elections are more clear results of what the people want.

[Anonymous No.11587591]

>>11587585
/po/ are actually hardline with their statistics and logic, and will eat people alive for not being the same. Feel free to go and argue with them. If they're being retarded, you haven't lost anything but a few minutes of your time.

[Anonymous No.11587590]

>>11587587
I don't read alt-right propaganda

[Anonymous No.11587597]

>>11587588
>Elections are more clear results of what the people want.
Absolutely not.
In an election you have to vote for a package.

Guessing the amount of support for immigration is really hard if you give people a large package.
Again, people from the CDU are against immigration, so even if you go by the results Germany is led by an anti immigration party. It has an explicitly anti immigratiom minister.
So all things considered, it is an anti immigration party.

Again. Where is your evidence?

[Anonymous No.11587599]

>>11587590
So why are you here?
I also have read communist propaganda, why are you so close minded?

Afraid of challenging your beliefs?

[Anonymous No.11587603]

>>11587430
No one voted for this and until fairly recently there was no option to vote against it. The media has systematically lied about the purposes and consequences of immigration, not to mention the brainwashing every white person has been subject to through social engineering. No one wants to live amongst mena filth, not even liberals

[Anonymous No.11587606]

>>11587588
Elections are always a compromise. If the anti-immigrant parties are retards in all other areas they're not going to get elected.
EU citizens, for the most part, are against mass immigration/replacement, but it's not the one and only thing they care about. It's a low priority issue for many.

>>11587597
I don't get it. How can Merkel's party be considered anti immigration? I don't follow German politics that much, but I'm pretty sure her government was very welcoming of immigrants.

[Anonymous No.11587611]

>>11587606
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKG76HF24_k
God, I hate gicing RT views, but it's the first result that came up

[Anonymous No.11587615]

>>11587603
>No one voted for this
And when the option was given those parties Rose from nothing to major players.

>>11587606
>How can Merkel's party be considered anti immigration?
The majority of voters are against Immigration.
Minister's of the party are against immigration.
Except for Merkel there is very much support towards limiting immigration in that party, especially in their sister party.
They aren't explicitly demanding *more Immigration and open borders* in their program, so calling them pro immigration is just wrong.

There are parties which demand more refugees, but look at the devastating hit the SPD got in the last elections.

>but I'm pretty sure her government was very welcoming of immigrants.
Merkel herself said he assumes that the refugees will leave.
Even calling Merkel herself "pro immigration" is questionable, she seems to regularly change her opinion on that. "Multi culturalism has failed" is a quote from herm

[Anonymous No.11587621]

>>11587430
it's obviously more complicated than that
example: when blair won the uk general election in 1997, it wasn't because his party was "pro immigration". it was a combination of various factors: people were sick of the tories, john major was a weak leader, blair was hugely popular and persuasive (he was a master of speechcraft), he was riding on the coat tails of the late john smith, his party promised major changes in policing ("tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"), education, economic reform and a raft of other stuff. immigration was way down the list.
the uk had never had massive immigration on the scale he introduced and it didn't register with most of the population exactly what he (and his cronies such as mandelson) were doing until it was too late
(note, the first time the uk had sustained immigration, rather than net emigration, was under thatcher, but the numbers were tiny by comparison)
people go on about blair being a "war criminal" but his real crimes were far worse than that

[Anonymous No.11587623]

>>11587578
Im not that anon but you are talking past them

>But in Germany for example a party who's members are mostly against immigration-

Voted for a party that is pro-immigration, is the other anon's point

>Technically-

This point is wrong if your first point is wrong

>I don't know what you understand as failure, but that isn't.

Not winning the election. They said that is what they are focusing on.

>They are usually fairly accurate at capturing opinions and predicting election results.

Except for when they dont predict election results, which is the other anon's point. They arent disagreeing with the polls, they didnt even bring it up, because they see these people not voting with what you are saying

>Because it isn't an important issue for many people I would guess.

Youre missing the point here. The point is that people dont treat polls the same as voting. Polls are important, no one disagrees with you it seems, but voting is more important and you dont see that

>They vote for parties. They don't vote for policy, don't you understand parliamentary democracy?

But they arent voting for anti-immigration parties

>but they don't get to vote on immigration, they get to vote on a large package

Thats a fair point, it could be that the polls are completely accurate but multiple positions in politics is making the anti-immigration party lose, versus, a hypothetical situation where the parties were only one political topic position.

>Again. Where is the evidence for your claims?

The election results, which they arent listing because its common knowledge. You can look this up easily, they mentioned who lost and own. Again your missing some points

[Anonymous No.11587627]

>>11587591
It will be more than a few minutes

[Anonymous No.11587628]

>>11587555
UKIP were never about power, they had one policy- to force a referendum about EU membership- and they were successful. of course, the fallout (endless whining about brexit) has been endlessly tedious.
ukip are dead as a party. they were always full of loonies and only the last few goons cling on to the hope of a revival. they did their one job, credit to them for that, let them die.

[Anonymous No.11587632]

>>11587611
>>11587615
The 2015 actions speak for themselves. I would never call Merkel anti-immigration. Her calling for immigrants to integrate doesn't change that, it's just your typical christian universalist stance.
>Merkel herself said he assumes that the refugees will leave.
No way she's that deluded, she knows very well they won't just like the Turks didn't...

[Anonymous No.11587636]

>>11587623
>Voted for a party that is pro-immigration, is the other anon's point
I know. Just that isn't really true either, calling the CDU pro migration means you didn't understand what that party believes in.

>Not winning the election.
But SD have a chance at that. That is why I brought them up.

>Except for when they dont predict election results, which is the other anon's point.
Yes. But they are maybe of by a few points.

>They arent disagreeing with the polls, they didnt even bring it up, because they see these people not voting with what you are saying
I don't understand what you are trying to say.

>but voting is more important
Obviously. But it is a bad indicator for a single issue.
Breaking down anti and pro migration parties and from that judging how much immigration support a country has is REALLY DUMB.

>But they arent voting for anti-immigration parties
Because there is no "anti migration party". Much like there isn't a "healthcare party" or a "raise the minimum wage party". You vote for a package.
And again people DO vote for anti immigration parties.

>The election results, which they arent listing because its common knowledge.
But they really don't indicate anything.
If 30% of people hate immigration but think that X issues is more important and they vote for a party which isn't explicitly anti immigration that doesn't mean these 30% are pro immigration.

[Anonymous No.11587638]

>>11587632
>I would never call Merkel anti-immigration. Her calling for immigrants to integrate doesn't change that, it's just your typical christian universalist stance.
I don't disagree. But that doesn't mean that isn't what people think about her and perceive her as.

>No way she's that deluded, she knows very well they won't just like the Turks didn't...
I can't see into her mind.

[Anonymous No.11587649]

>>11587636
>calling the CDU pro migration means you didn't understand what that party believes in.
You can split it either way, theyre doing what you dont want, and youre anti-immigration. Theyre doing what you claim the members dont want, and those members are anti-immigration

Whatever is not anti-immigration, is what they are. Its just easier to call them pro and you know that

>But SD have a chance at that
Fairly certain the other anon was talking about past elections. Whatever happens in the future happens

>Yes. But they are maybe of by a few points.
Youre still not getting it. The polls could be accurate 100%, but they still dont vote the way you are saying they should

Thats the point. They say one thing at the polls, and they dont vote with you

>I don't understand what you are trying to say.
Im not sure why since im just repeating the same point over to you really. The other anon said that polls are not the same as voting results

You understand that im sure. Someone says one thing at the polls, and then votes differently. If the polls are saying, they dont want immigration, they arent voting that way. The other anon is making the point that this difference is because they dont actually hate immigration in the way its being portrayed, or something like that

Im going to skip some of this

>If 30% of people hate immigration but think that X issues is more important and they vote for a party which isn't explicitly anti immigration that doesn't mean these 30% are pro immigration.

Thats one way to look at it sure, but how do you know this with the certainty youre claiming? The polls cant tell you that, thats your interpretation that the other anon disagrees with.

The other anon is saying, they are pro immigration enough to vote along with pro immigration. When push comes to shove, they buck out. If they didnt want it, they wouldnt vote for it.

That seems just as likely as your interpretation. There is no clear way to split this unless you or the other anon bring up something else for your argument, and you reposting the polls is not doing that

[Anonymous No.11587651]

>>11587017
Read this one instead, it's written by an actually intelligent and accomplished historian.

[Anonymous No.11587676]

Why hasn’t anyone posted the “essential mid-wit core” chart yet?

[Anonymous No.11587677]

>>11587649
>theyre doing what you dont want
I don't think that is entirely true.

>but they still dont vote the way you are saying they should
You are dumb. I don't say anything about what the results should look like.

>They say one thing at the polls, and they dont vote with you
The green party has 2% (a guess) support in the US. Do you conclude from that that 2% of Americans care about the environment???
No YOU FUCKING DON'T.

>Someone says one thing at the polls, and then votes differently.
NO THAT IS NOT HOW PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACY WORKS.
There is no immigration yes/no vote. There never has been one.

>The other anon is making the point that this difference is because they dont actually hate immigration in the way its being portrayed, or something like that
Which is wrong. Painfully wrong and I explained why it is wrong.
Again you PEOPLE DON'T VOTE ON ISSUES THERE IS NO "ANTI IMMIGRATION PARTY".

>but how do you know this with the certainty youre claiming?
By asking people what they think about immigration OF COURSE.
How else would you do that??

>they are pro immigration enough to vote along with pro immigration.
Yeah. That might be true. Never denied this, it also doesn't matter and I already told you that there might be more important biddies for many people, pensions for example.

>When push comes to shove
No. They care more for other issues, they ARE NOT ASKED for their opinion on immigration.

>That seems just as likely as your interpretation
Yeah. People say they are against immigration and then vote for parties which don't support harsh stances on immigration.

Again. Do you judge the level of support for environmental protection by the amount of people voting for the green party? Or by asking the people. PLEASE TELL ME.

[Anonymous No.11587751]

>>11587677
>Do you judge the level of support for environmental protection by the amount of people voting for the green party?
I'd judge the amount of real loonies by votes for the green party, much as I'd judge the amount of real anti immigrant loonies by votes for UKIP. Anyone with a brain can see the vast economic and cultural benefits of not being a sealed hermit kingdom. No sane person wishes to completely ban immigration. People like it and vote accordingly, much like people vote for capitalism. They don't really care about the emotional blood and soil stuff, they will follow the money

[Anonymous No.11587770]

>>11587751
Again 35% of suspects in criminal cases are foreigners here in Germany.
I am okay with immigration if there are no places where ethnic natives are less then ~95% or so.

But if there are parts of my city where German isn't spoken anymore that line is crossed and apparently the majority agrees with me.

[Anonymous No.11587784]

>>11587430
You're acting like people haven't been systematically brainwashed since the 60s with leftists policies.

[Anonymous No.11587789]

they're all right in some way
whichever book you post there's truth in it

[Anonymous No.11587795]

>Br*ts writing books about Europe
Can they take their fucking isle and fuck off to Canada already?

[Anonymous No.11587819]

>>11587591
2/10

[Anonymous No.11587822]

Immigrants that live in Europe are still European. If anything it's their culture that is disappearing in favour of western culture

[Anonymous No.11587825]

>>11587784
“Leftist policy” is an oxymoron

[Anonymous No.11587826]

>>11587591
and they know some fucking top origami stuff too

[Anonymous No.11587836]

>>11587822
>If anything it's their culture that is disappearing in favour of western culture
But their countries still exist just fine?
Additionally integration is something I don't really see happening, the people here don't even give up their language.

[Anonymous No.11587857]

>>11587023
>- Europe is essentially being invaded against the will of its occupants according to the design of an international bureaucracy centred in Brussels

it's more like you can either have relatively pro-immigration center parties or fascist, reactionary, emotional, corrupt, pro-Putin and unreliable anti-immigration parties to choose from. People liked the idea of less immigration but only have gammon parties to vote for.

[Anonymous No.11587866]

>>11587857
>fascist, reactionary, emotional, corrupt, pro-Putin
Such as?

[Anonymous No.11587870]

>>11587836
>the people here don't even give up their language

And?

[Anonymous No.11587871]

>>11587866
Can you name a "populist", anti-immigration-focused European party that does NOT meet the definition? Maybe PVV or Vlams Belang or whatever.

[Anonymous No.11587872]

>>11587751
This is such a quintessentially UK post. Nobody in Europe is quite as thoroughly brainwashed by neo-liberalist ideology as the UK. Germans might have a ton of white guilt, but they still have a soul.
I'm really glad you guys are exiting the EU.

[Anonymous No.11587875]

>>11587872
Germans are autistic bugs.

[Anonymous No.11587879]

>>11587870
>And?
Language is a central part of their culture, they obviously have no desire to give up their culture and aren't doing so.
If they become the majority in some areas the native culture will be erased.

[Anonymous No.11587886]

>>11587871
Name a single Fascist thing about the AfD.
They are basically free market capitalists with a lesbian leader, quite the reactionaries.

I mean honestly, as someone who rather identifies with Fascism I wished that they were, but they aren't much different then the CDU two decades ago.

[Anonymous No.11587891]

>>11587879
Cultures don’t exist, it’s a meme

[Anonymous No.11587893]

>>11587891
Oh, good to know.

[Anonymous No.11587907]

>>11587822
>Immigrants that live in Europe are still European.
No. They're a foreign people living in Europe. They don't care about Europe, they'd live anywhere as long as they could and they got enough gibs.
>If anything it's their culture that is disappearing in favour of western culture
I agree, to an extent. I don't share this panic about Sharia law taking over Europe (even though it demonstrably is taking over in some areas). Most people won't take it. But we are all still becoming less liberal as a consequence of immigration (see the freedom of speech restrictions in the UK, burka bans in Denmark etc.)

>>11587875
Germans are morally/spiritually slightly less fucked up than the UK, but it's still an important difference.
The rest of Europe is in better shape. France is quite fucked demographically, but they are capable of rebellion. It's the birthplace of a lot of dissident thought that's inspiring the world. The UK in its current state is quite sad in comparison, it's an individualistic dystopia.

[Anonymous No.11587914]

>>11587907
>They don't care about Europe

What about “native” Europeans who don’t care about “muh Evropa” either? What should be done about them?

[Anonymous No.11587926]

>>11587914
They're mostly brainless cattle, but they'll still play for "their team" if push comes to shove.
A lot of them can be educated ("redpilled"). Keep in mind that what is considered "racist/nazi" right now was common sense even 10-20 years ago.

[Anonymous No.11588371]

>>11587606
>I don't get it.
Yes, we've already gathered that from your other posts

[Anonymous No.11588430]

>>11587037

Undermining the unity of european nations, the quality of their people, and erasing its culture... all for some vague empathy.

[Anonymous No.11588520]

>>11588430
what "unity of european nations"?
we've been at war with each other throughout history
still doesn't mean we should have to let in every random wog though

[Anonymous No.11588607]

>>11587531
H-how dare you bring facts into an argument of feels! How dare you, sir!

[Anonymous No.11588684]

>>11587926
>muh false consciousness
Yes anon, one day the masses will rise in your favour

[Anonymous No.11588693]

>>11588607
le epic sarcasm man :)

[Anonymous No.11588698]

>>11588520
I take it he means unity within nations, not between them

[Anonymous No.11588702]

>>11587056
We will clean our countries

[Anonymous No.11588868]

>>11588698
same applies. look at the shifting borders of france and germany, or eastern europe. tribal allegiance trumps national allegiance. there used to be places called czechoslovakia, yugoslavia, prussia etc etc
sure there are some countries that have borders unchanged for centuries but fuck the swiss, the only good thing to come out of there is chocolate and those useful little knives

[Anonymous No.11588897]

>>11588698
what unity within nations? Almost every single one of these borders for each modern European nation was forged only in twentieth century, and for the first half of it they went to war twice and slaughtered each other, not to mention all of the "internal" wars in Ireland/UK, Spain, Italy, Yugoslavia, Greece, Finland, etc etc.

In fact this comment is so ridiculous, it's clear you have zero fucking knowledge of history.

[Anonymous No.11588917]

>>11587891

t. retard

[Anonymous No.11589268]

>>11587576
>I just feel comfortable

People died because of this fucking dirty piece of shit.

WHY ISN'T ANYONE FUCKING LIVID?!

[Anonymous No.11589757]

>>11587606
CDU/CSU is traditionally a conservative christian party, there are many members who are against/sceptical of immigration. There is a lot if conflict inside of the party because of it. Just because people right from the CDU consider it leftwing doesn't make it so. It's a centre-right party.

[Anonymous No.11590022]

>>11588868
>look at the shifting borders of france and germany, or eastern europe.
But why does that even matter?
People shifted with the borders and that shifting is what allowed peace.

>tribal allegiance trumps national allegiance
What an obvious trueism.
It's like saying "my family matters to me more then a random Englishman", this has always been true, but it doesn't mean that the nation's itself are divided.

>there used to be places called czechoslovakia, yugoslavia, prussia etc
Yes, but so what?
Yugoslavia is was a great example of how to not do a nation, Czechoslovakia peacefully divided itself and Prussia morphed into Germany.
What of that is evidence that today's nation's are divided? Where is the great ethnic conflict between the Brandenburgians and the North Rhein Westphalians.
Why does that even matter? Yes 150 years ago Germany wasn't a thing, why does that imply that today Germany is a divided nation, where ethnic tribes battle each other.
I honestly fail to see that, the only serious divide I see is ideological, but you clearly aren't arguing along those lines.

>sure there are some countries that have borders unchanged for centuries
But the nation's, the people remained, even when the borders shifted. When Germany was formed the Prusdians didn't drop dead, neither did they when the USSR arrived in eastern Germany, they are still there.

>the only good thing to come out of there is chocolate and those useful little knives
Watches, you are forgetting watches.

[Anonymous No.11590047]

>>11590022
anon you appear to be a bit of an idiot and not very familiar with europe

[Anonymous No.11590056]

>>11590047
???
What did I say that was wrong?

[Anonymous No.11590093]

god i hope scotland secedes from these dumbass britbongs

[Anonymous No.11591254]

>>11587023
>against the will of its occupants
flawed understanding of the situation. europeans are so meek that a lot probably do want it. t. brit

[Anonymous No.11591298]

>>11587017
No and yes.

[Anonymous No.11591316]

>another /pol/ thread on /lit/

mods please....

there's a whole board for people who want to irrationally justify their xenophobia, we dont need this on lit...

[Anonymous No.11591358]

>>11587603
>meteor
stopped reading there

[Anonymous No.11591971]

>>11590093
That chip on your shoulder fuelled by a life-long inferiority complex is never going to go away, is it?
Such a beautiful country, but you tartanoid, angry, CTE, word slurring Brits are far worse than your southern cousins. And the whole inferiority complex thing makes you folks so much more unattractive.

[Anonymous No.11592037]

>>11591971
hearty kek

[Anonymous No.11592495]

>>11591316
>irrationally
*tips fedora*

[Anonymous No.11592527]

there are anti-truck bricks surrounding all the markets and the schools are 60% foreigner but it's ok because you only have to walk ten feet to get kebab

just think of how much quicker our retirement accounts will grow if we don't have children and let someone else do it, don't be racist

[Anonymous No.11592568]

>>11587037
No it is a good thing. Europeans have become weak and complacent since the end of WW2 and it is about time they felt under pressure again. Either there will be an organized push-back and reemergence of martial spirit or they will be swamped out and diluted and disappear, proving that they are no longer the same people who built the culture in which they find themselves. Both are acceptable outcomes.

[Anonymous No.11592578]

>>11592568
>Europeans have become weak and complacent since the end of WW2
>reemergence of martial spirit
Just like in your animes

[Anonymous No.11592589]

>>11592578
historically it does happen that a complacent people become reawakened through hardship bred from their delusive civilized ways. It's either that or extinction

[Anonymous No.11592590]

>>11592578
you have to go back (to reddit), merkle

[Anonymous No.11592619]

>>11592568
ah yes, complacent: or, in other words, unparalleled economic stability, political stability, living standards, declining inequality, high marks on any life satisfaction/happiness index, et cetera.

But yes, oogie boogie immigrants that comprise of usually 2-10% of a country's population are the new apocalypse. Jesus what a weak person you must be.

[Anonymous No.11592624]

>>11592619
yes it's totally fine that the birth rate in germany is 1.3 or whatever, you can just replace that with Somali immigrants and everything will be wonderful

you people are constant comedy

[Anonymous No.11592633]

>>11592619
>ah yes, complacent: or, in other words, unparalleled economic stability, political stability, living standards, declining inequality, high marks on any life satisfaction/happiness index, et cetera

Exactly. Soft, comfortable, content to just pass the time working 9 to 5 as a taxcow on the way toward the grave. The perfect man for the end of history, devoid of spirit or greatness.

>oogie boogie immigrants that comprise of usually 2-10%
The concern, I believe, is with the disparities between native and immigrant birthrates.

>the new apocalypse
God, I hope so.

[Anonymous No.11592641]

>>11589268
because terrorists and africans with knives can't even do any real damage. Fellow white people torched the city and forced the citizens to live in martial law. Thousands upon thousands of British men lay in unmarked graves across Europe due to wars with white people in the 20th century. Significantly more terrorism existed in britain during a period called The Troubles... which was due to white people.

If you're super scared in London, which is safer than its ever been in the past couple centuries, you're pretty pathetic.

[Anonymous No.11592646]

>>11592641
you realize that if enough outside people who dont give ashit about the country come in, it genuinely does collapse?

do you want Lebanon to happen to every western country?

[Anonymous No.11592648]

>>11592633
>The concern, I believe, is with the disparities between native and immigrant birthrates.
and? then what happens? the end of history? so it's not our nuclear weapons but the oogie boogie brown immigrants that ends history? finish the story, instead of relying on just unspoken appeals to a racial paranoia, I'd like to admire the creativity.

[Anonymous No.11592653]

>>11592646
I can't speak for folks on the continent, but you can't really claim that the london immigrants don't give a shit about london or england; they're just as obnoxiously loud and proud of being from there as the cockneys.

[Anonymous No.11592659]

>>11592648
our nuclear weapons are actively degrading and have to be maintained by people capable of maintaining them.

Do you really not understand the consequences of mass infertility and immigration of lower iq populations, some of which are actively hostile against the people in the countries they are coming to?

obvioulsy this has never happened before because industrial society has never happened before, not to mention our current digital age, but it can break too, everything can break, and it is still at present dependent on human lives, on people birthing children who will contribute to the system, and that is rapidly degrading

idk what the collapse will look like but it is coming, maybe in 2150, 2200, i have no idea, maybe earlier for certain countries, but we are all becoming Brazil and that is not a good state to be in, because Brazil could not even exist in its dysfunction without outside help in terms of technological application coming from more ordered countries

[Anonymous No.11592666]

>>11592653
there are many immigrants who love the land and people, i would never deny that, i grew up in another anglosphere country surrounded by just such people, and theyre great

but you're missing the bigger picture here, there is a tipping point, there is a certain amount that has to get done that eventually won't get done because the incentives aren't there. that is how all civilizations collapse, we aren't different just because our technology is so advanced, the same rules still apply to basic production

[Anonymous No.11592684]

>the artificial constructs we invented in the 19th century are totally real

[Anonymous No.11592693]

>>11592666
>there is a tipping point
ah but now you're trying to get into a more nuanced argument based on the idea of how controlled cultural and community change ought to be to maintain an ordered and stable society. That could theoretically be a normal and reasonable discussion than non-racially paranoid, feverish weak people such as yourself could engage in. The unspoken paranoia of 'I FEEL LIVID BECAUSE PEOPLE DIED FROM """DIVERSITY""" YET WE'RE SAFER THAN EVER BEFORE AND SOMEONE MIGHT FEEL COMFORTABLE IN THAT', which intentionally ignores the reality of centuries of death and terrorism wrought by the non-diverse populations before... is not an intelligent or reasonable discussion. It's one driven by your weak and fearful inability to think properly because of racial paranoia.

In the more nuanced topic being suggested in the two more recent posts: sure. I agree we should control immigration and try to maintain levels that disrupt community cohesion less. It is not good to have immigrant ghettos and two-tiered societies. For example, while the South Asians have done better in London integrating and contributing (for example), it's a bit different up in Leicester and Bradford, so it's a reasonable point to figure out how to lessen the latter situation.

[Anonymous No.11592702]

>>11592693
anon the race question is not actually in debate, read the literature. You are still operating in a naive state, of everyone being the same, they are not.

if you cant do that i fear we are at an impasse

[Anonymous No.11592711]

>>11592648
>and? then what happens? the end of history? so it's not our nuclear weapons but the oogie boogie brown immigrants that ends history?

When I use history is in the Hegelian sense and "the end" of it by way of Fukuyama. You seem to be interpreting it as some kind of Armageddon situation when it refers to nothing so refreshingly ecstatic.

> finish the story, instead of relying on just unspoken appeals to a racial paranoia, I'd like to admire the creativity.

There is this astronomical designation known as a Brown Dwarf that refers to a stellar object just heavier than the heaviest gas giant but with a mass just shy of being able to begin nuclear fusion and ignite in to a star. Sometimes people call them Failed Stars.

[Anonymous No.11592719]

>>11592702
first off, you're a fucking moron. Race is an artificial construct. Genetics and culture ARE meaningful though. Second, no, not everyone is the same; that is retarded. But culture and genetics is a near infinite spectrum, not a neat box of handy races that you can use to visually delineate people. I believe Anglo culture is worthy and worth promoting and defending. However, you, for example, are an idiot. Doesn't matter if you're black or white. Your weakness is not worth promoting or defending, so you don't get the ride the coattails of a greater culture to pretend your paranoia something less cowardly than it is.

[Anonymous No.11592732]

>>11592684
>but the ones we invented in the late 20th early 21st totally are real

[Anonymous No.11592738]

>>11592719
There are clear genetic clusters all the way from the continental level to the family. Races can easily be seen to exist just like ethnic groups.

[Anonymous No.11592749]

>>11592719
you haven't read even one contemporary paper about genetics

they increasingly confirm almost every supposition people had about racism

[Anonymous No.11592754]

>>11592738
This doesn't solve the issue of you being an idiot who is a disgrace to your culturogenetic cluster. Merit and strength still matter. Weak paranoia and being an idiot aren't excusable just because you were born and raised in a stronger culture.

[Anonymous No.11592759]

>>11592754
What the fuck are you talking about you erratic retard? Nothing to do with the scientific fact of race.

[Anonymous No.11592762]

No, and probably. Just look at the replies ITT.
Europeans want to be destroyed.

[Anonymous No.11592764]

>>11592759
Genetics are real. Having a few categories called race is not real, that's a construct. Stop using it. Say genetics because it has all the infinite shades to explain groups of people and to explain individuals. Plenty of individual blacks are smarter than you. But that's because your an idiot. I've had morning shits that I think would have higher cognitive ability.

[Anonymous No.11592767]

>>11592759

It's trying to shame you into ending the conversation. Saying you are insecure etc. and that a big man would welcome immigrants or some nonsense like that.
All they can do, really.

[Anonymous No.11592768]

>>11592759
his ideas are all entangled with notions of identity, he hasn't yet learnt how to think because leftism has poisoned his mind

it's crazy the degree to which you can't think about basic concept when you have to have an idea about them given by your society that you cnat ever question.

but he has the desire and ability, or he wouldn't be here

[Anonymous No.11592784]

>>11592767
>a big man would welcome immigrants or some nonsense like that.
No I'm saying a big man controls his borders but doesn't pretend like the oogie boogie immigrants that were let in are somehow reeking havoc left and right. Europeans overcorrected after spending centuries slaughtering each other by letting in too many immigrants too fast, that is true, and it should be corrected. The topline posts I was responding to were specifically posts that were fearful and pretended that European nations were some cohesive and happy before the brown folks came, and that's so ahistorical and stupid it can only be explained by paranoia or idiocy.

[Anonymous No.11592786]

>>11592764
Yes, genetics are real, and they show clearly that there are genetic clusters of certain people. If your argument is that these categories don't exist then and simply fade into each along a cline, then you can do away with the concept of species as well. Also a reminder that individuals are exceptions and don't represent the average

[Anonymous No.11592789]

>>11587037
Hoping this is bait.

[Anonymous No.11592791]

>>11592764

You're not arguing against race, you are arguing against the Madison Grant definition of race, into three apparent divisions.
What you suggest would entail nothing more than adding a few to the preexisting set.

[Anonymous No.11592792]

>>11592768
>because leftism
I'm right wing, but sure. I just prefer my ideology to not be shallow and weak. The left itself though is also divided between folks who have a sensible notion on how to manage immigration and weak idiots who just think everyone is the same, so it makes it hard to properly ally across over the issue.

[Anonymous No.11592805]

>>11592791
>a few to the preexisting set.
Sure. I know how sets work. My point is that the race realist folks suspiciously don't do that. They tend to think in massive groupings. The fact is the genetic effects can and do exist in microcommunities even; even within white populations of the British Isles there are differences. Race in modern English obscures to broad groups and colors that weak people can use to lazily use to construct broader narrative of grand struggles between massive groups of people.

[Anonymous No.11592816]

>>11592784

>doesn't pretend like the oogie boogie immigrants that were let in are somehow reeking havoc left and right.

They are, in some places. The fact that you don't see those places every day doesn't make the disruption and abuse any less real.

>posts that were fearful and pretended that European nations were some cohesive and happy before the brown folks came,

They were more cohesive, and individually probably happier, for a variety of reasons of which immigration is both symptom and cause.
Could 21st century France or Britain sustain the Home Front as they did in 1914-18 & 1939-1945 respectively?
Take for granted that European countries were no more or less happy and no more or less cohesive - has immigration worsened or bettered that state, in your opinion?
He seems no more fearful of immigration than you do of nationalism, by the way.

>brown folks

Presuming you're non-Anglo European, seeing you use this phrase makes my skin crawl.

[Anonymous No.11592824]

>>11587857

This guy knows it. In my country the extreme right was on an uninterrupted ascent from the '80s untill 2004, simply because not a single other party dared to criticize immigration, even in a nuanced way.
They all hid behind political correctness and called everyone who didn't agree racist, driving people who had nuanced views on migration to the far right.
Only in recent years a centre-right party offered an alternative by adopting a kind of 'hard-but-fair' policy on migration and they became the biggest party over the course of 2 elections.

[Anonymous No.11592832]

>>11592816
>you're non-Anglo European
I'm a Brit

>you do of nationalism
I'm a nationalist.

>Could 21st century France or Britain sustain the Home Front as they did in 1914-18 & 1939-1945
There would need to be a war first. When you are actually under mortal threat you can sustain a heroic defense (bar the French from that though).

>Take for granted that European countries were no more or less happy and no more or less cohesive
Britain has had centuries of wild social and political upheaval, far beyond today. Despite this, we still developed a strong intellectual culture, military might, artistic culture etc. But we weren't cohesive, that's ahistorical.

We might have been better off after world war 2 without all the immigration. We're in a better state than before, but that's not because of the immigration. The Irish came and then clandestinely funded terrorism against us. The Indians came and brought good food and became doctors and contributors so they're the better than the Irish were. The Poles, Africans, and Muslims were too many too quickly though and should have been managed better. They hardly create any havoc approaching what the Irish did or what the 19th/early 20th century did. And that's just the historical fact.

[Anonymous No.11592837]

>>11592805

>My point is that the race realist folks suspiciously don't do that. They tend to think in massive groupings.

I'd disagree. I deliberately avoid the subject because it doesn't interest me particularly, but they seem to be the ones who take the time to distinguish between groups in detail.
The people who think in massive groupings tend to be their opponents, who have become too accustomed to beating at straw men with regards to the racial issue - the Madison Grant framework has proven so convenient for supposedly refuting racialism that they are unwilling to give it up, they will tell racialists that they actually do operate under the obsolete old categories in order for their semantic arguments to hold water.
When this is transcended, the conversation degenerates into word games, revolving around the idea that any concept of race that doesn't follow the old model is not race at all, and should be called by something that is either very similar to or totally synonymous with race, like ethnicity or nation, both of which express the same idea with a different root language.

If the word 'race' obscures the diversity of genetic groups, it is not because of the racialists, it is because of a rote-learned argument against racialism which was so comfortable for so long that the anti-racialists became flabby, and now they have to set all the rules of discourse in order to maintain their position.
Your post shows this flaw, by the way. You want to talk about the use of the word and define it according to the reliable and well established method, rather than discussing what the word signifies.
You're acknowledging the reality of race while denying the reality of race, and moralising to avoid any conclusions being drawn. 'Weak people' and so on.

>within white populations of the British Isles there are differences.

You mean within the British nations or between those nations?

[Anonymous No.11592845]

>>11587430
>Pro immigration parties have consistently won elections across Europe

they have NEVER gone to election on "pro immigration". It was always old parties that the people voted for because of habits.

[Anonymous No.11592851]

>>11592837
>You mean within the British nations or between those nations?
Within the British isles. I don't know exactly what you mean by nations, but even within England there are differences between, say, Cornish and Northumberland in culture, genetics, and behavior.

>the conversation degenerates into word games
The conversation always devolves into word games. Your entire point is a word game on race. It's literally a post about the usage of word and how it gets used in different ways. Back before the nineteenth century when race meant communities and small ethnic groups, but the Madison Grant framework is literally centuries old now and race realists and leftists adhere to it.

>'Weak people' and so on.
Sorry, I call out weakness. Using ahistorical reasoning and paranoid prognostications is weakness. Maybe I am quicker and harsher to call it out on other right wing folks because I don't think it's worth even bothering with left wing folks, but I don't have any qualms on vilifying weak and insecure mentalities.

[Anonymous No.11592868]

>>11592832

>I'm a Brit

Stop sucking down American shite then.

>nationalist

Of what nation?

>When you are actually under mortal threat you can sustain a heroic defense

If there is unity and cohesion. It doesn't materialise out of the aether. When you are under mortal threat, certain factions can usurp power by appealing to the aggressor for support as well, the important factor is the people of the country being attacked.
But you didn't answer the question.
Do you think that 21st century Britain, facing down a threat comparable to Nazi Germany, could sustain public morale through years of rationing and endless lists of war dead?

>Britain has had centuries of wild social and political upheaval, far beyond today.
>But we weren't cohesive

Britain didn't exist for most of those centuries. It's only had three. Difficult to be cohere when there are multiple nations being taken into consideration.
As for social upheaval, I don't think the island has ever gone through such changes as those which accompany industrialisation and concurrently globalisation, changes which continue today.

>They hardly create any havoc approaching what the Irish did or what the 19th/early 20th century did. And that's just the historical fact.

How do you figure that out? The changes and disruptions accompanying mass immigration today are pretty similar to those which accompanied the migration of the Irish.

[Anonymous No.11592878]

>>11587017
> map on the cover
> Turkey is Europe
> Russia isn't

[Anonymous No.11592893]

>>11592659
>Europe is racially homogeneous
Centuries of constant internecine warfare
>some brown people move in
OMG! This slight influx might cause conflicts in an otherwise peaceful Europe
Do you people have the faintest understanding of history?

[Anonymous No.11592900]

>>11592878
Even Turkey is more European than Russia

[Anonymous No.11592914]

>>11592851

>I don't know exactly what you mean by nations

Of course you do. English, Welsh, Scots and Irish.
The Cornish are Welsh, and the Northumbrians are plainly English, with less continental influence on their speech.

>The conversation always devolves into word games. Your entire point is a word game on race. It's literally a post about the usage of word and how it gets used in different ways.

No, the point is that regardless of how flexible, or complex, or any other term you make the term, 'race' remains a word reflective of a physical reality.
You can have three races or thirty but it doesn't change the fundamental character of the term.

>the Madison Grant framework is literally centuries old now and race realists and leftists adhere to it.

Race realists don't use this framework, that's what I was saying. They have to be made to adhere to it in order for the traditional stable of arguments against them to have any validity these days.
Quietly ignoring that the Madison Grant scheme is not the one which they are working from allows you to claim victory without ever having fought a battle.

>Sorry, I call out weakness.

'Calling out' is a novelty phrase from American films.
In the movies, the character who is the target of the 'call out' never gets a line in, that is why so many people like to imagine themselves doing it to someone else, and why it has become a popular phrase. You're not 'calling out' anything, you're inflating pointless insults with moralising and pseudo-decisive buzzwords, for lack of anything meatier.
Insecurity is a condition of life, by the way, everything and everyone is insecure, in every way.

[Anonymous No.11592918]

>>11592868
>pretty similar to those which accompanied the migration of the Irish.
Sure, minus the fortnightly bombings. I'd reckon that's an important qualifer.

>

>Do you think that 21st century Britain, facing down a threat comparable to Nazi Germany, could sustain public morale through years of rationing and endless lists of war dead?
Yes, absolutely.

>Of what nation?
You seem to use nation in a way an intentionally mercurial way, but it's meant to mean English here. Who knows if there's some word game you're playing where the correct answer is Britain or a smaller grouping like Yorkshire or whatever.

>Stop sucking down American shite then.
Fuck off, you don't even know what you're talking about, you just thought you found a cute shibboleth to guess I was a brit. Americans don't even have "brown folks" i.e. asians. Everything for them is black/white/mexican.

>Britain didn't exist for most of those centuries. It's only had three.
I don't think its really important to fixate on when Scotland joined. I wasn't really implying that lack of cohesion was coming from battles with the Scots alone.

[Anonymous No.11592925]

>>11592893

>slight influx

The largest migration event in European history, turning some of Europe's largest cities majority non-European in the space of a single generation.
Do you not understand why the demographic decline etc. is significant, or do you understand perfectly well and want to negate or trivialise it?

[Anonymous No.11592927]

>>11592918
>minus the fortnightly bombings

Lmao, no

[Anonymous No.11592931]

>>11592925
>muh demographics

[Anonymous No.11592933]

>>11592659
shouldn't worry about it anon, by 2100 the planet is going to be too hot to live on anyway

[Anonymous No.11592935]

>>11592914
>The Cornish are Welsh
ehh, again for someone who said earlier you don't like word games, you've now done it for race and nation. The Cornish aren't Welsh, but they share a common Brittonic Celtic heritage.

[Anonymous No.11592939]

>>11592927
Fortnightly was intentional rhetorical exaggeration, but it was pretty intense. Here's the list just for *London* let alone Belfast, Manchester, et cetera, so actually fortnightly might not be so far off.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_London

[Anonymous No.11592945]

>>11592918

>Sure, minus the fortnightly bombings.

Car attacks, mass rape and so on approaches the scale of disruption. Add to that the disorganised violent crime and I think it begins to approach the level of disruption caused by the IRA, diffused across a wider area.

>Yes, absolutely.

You're delusional.

>You seem to use nation in a way an intentionally mercurial way,

Not at all. I've never referred to Britain or Brits as a nation in anything I've posted ITT.

>Fuck off, you don't even know what you're talking about

Oh but I do, pet. Nobody except nu worlders and those who let nu worlders write their thoughts say 'brown folks', 'calling out' and that sort of mush.
Also 'just not okay'. Makes me pine for the days of tragic tots, odium and vileness.

[Anonymous No.11592967]

>>11592931

>muh muh!

>>11592935

If Welsh means anything at all, then the Cornish are Welsh. Race and nation are synonymous, the confusion comes from creating a distinction between the two.

[Anonymous No.11592977]

>>11587017
He is not. Europe never had a unified identity, and nothing extraordinary is happening.

[Anonymous No.11593016]

>>11592925
But how will this demographic change (which you haven't shown is a bad thing) lead to more violence? Europe was racially homogeneous for centuries, but this did not prevent WW2, WW1, He Napoleonic Wars, the Seven Years War, The Thirty Years War etc etc. Where have you pulled this racially homogeneous = peaceable idea from?

[Anonymous No.11593028]

>>11593016
>But how will this demographic change (which you haven't shown is a bad thing) lead to more violence?
Take a walk through some Paki neighborhood holding your boyfriend's hand and you'll see.

Also, certain "races" are genetically more predisposed toward violent behavior.

But personally, I wouldn't want these people even if they were peaceful and well integrated. It's partly an irrational desire (but not any more irrational than wanting diversity/racemixing).

[Anonymous No.11593055]

>>11593016

>But how will this demographic change (which you haven't shown is a bad thing) lead to more violence?

It can only be a bad thing for someone, or some people. In this case, I'd say it's bad for the host nations in each European country, since they have to compete with an increasingly large number of people for resources, services, housing, etc.
Considering that you situate yourself in the position of the prospective immigrant to Europe, and I in the position of the European, who already lives here, shouldn't it be you explaining to me why the demographic replacement is a good thing?

>Europe was racially homogeneous for centuries

The states of Europe have often been multiethnic, often been divided, often been subjected to the squabbles of aristocrats. As I said, you are clinging to the old framework of race.
You could say that Austria-Hungary was a heterogenous society - was that diversity a strength or a weakness?

>Where have you pulled this racially homogeneous = peaceable idea from?

Nowhere, I didn't pull it at all.

[Anonymous No.11593095]

>>11593055
>compete with an increasingly large number of people for resources, services, housing,
So a zero-sum-game fallacy? The economy doesn't work the way you think it does.
>demographic replacement is a good thing?
Some people have babies, some don't. It's better to live in a society where people are free to choose whether they have children than one in which people like you force them. Also, you could abandon your weird racial identity ideas and see people as humans rather than competing groups.
>The states of Europe have often been multiethnic
So what's the problem? Unless you are clinging to some old definition of race or something?

[Anonymous No.11593128]

Best part of the book is when the fag starts cying about Godlesness in Europe

[Anonymous No.11593182]

>>11593095
> It's better to live in a society where people are free to choose whether they have children than one in which people like you force them.
Who is forcing people to have children? If anything modern capitalism is forcing people to have less children than they'd want to.
Also are the mothers of future immigrants free to choose whether they have children or not? They're almost certainly less 'free' than women already living here. If we're using their kids to solve our demographic challenges, then aren't we relying on women being 'forced' into giving birth anyway?

[Anonymous No.11593272]

>>11593182

[Anonymous No.11594299]

>>11593128
Cringe and bluepilled

[Anonymous No.11594655]

>>11593095
So a zero-sum-game fallacy? The economy doesn't work the way you think it does.
Muh economy. That's stupid. We can store billion dollars into one hard drive. We can't store billion people into one building. Some parts of economy and society don't scale linearly or immediately which can and will hurt majority of people.

[Anonymous No.11594662]

if only there could be a strange death of this fucking thread

[Anonymous No.11594697]

>>11588702
Kek

[Anonymous No.11594721]

>>11594662
Sad!

[Anonymous No.11594767]

>>11588702

Jordan "Hitler Was Just Cleaning His Room" Peterson uses quantum tunneling to give nazi salute 10 times simultaneously.

[Anonymous No.11595162]

>>11594655
The population of Europe increased exponentially between the agricultural revolution and the present. And yet, we are not many times poorer then medieval peasants. Population increase does not necessarily lead to poverty and competition

[Anonymous No.11595172]

I don’t know anything other than the fact that women in burkas make me extremely uncomfortable

[Anonymous No.11595192]

We know who is in charge of western institutions and promoting the current invasion. It's no secret.

There are two types of people: one that names the jew and one who doesn't. The Author of this book does not.

[Anonymous No.11595247]

>>11595192
>There are two types of people: one that names the jew and one who gets published
fix'd

[Anonymous No.11595249]

>>11587751

This has to be bait...this has to be bait...

In what way was the UK a sealed hermit kingdom at any point in the last 150 years and what does that have the do with the wave of immigration over the last thirty years?

Also, what are the economic benefits when at least half of all immigrants arrive without post-secondary education and flood the labour market that is shared with uneducated young natives? The benefit is solely to employers, who gain an almost endless supply of low-wage labour and can keep wages low. This happened in the 70s in the US when women flooded the workforce. Now, one-income households are almost non-existent because it's nearly impossible.

[Anonymous No.11595302]

>>11595247
Touché, but that's changing. The future market is on the side of those who name the jew.

[Anonymous No.11595308]

>>11595192

DA JOOOOOOOOS

[Anonymous No.11595310]

>>11595302
Markets are self-optimizing systems that control both jews and gentiles.

[Anonymous No.11595322]

>>11587023
>against the will of its occupants

[pooposter !!ciZV6Id/Qdc No.11595326]

>>11587017
it is so based, and so redpilled too, I use it to redpill the normies

[Anonymous No.11595329]

>>11595310
Markets don't control anything; people control markets. The choices people make determine whose interests they serve, which is why the jewish publishing industry has until recently been able to not allow books like 200 Years Together to be published. That is not a market force, it is a decision by a foreign tribe in control of our institutions.

[Anonymous No.11595384]

>>11595329
You're fucked kid

[Anonymous No.11595402]

>>11595329
The far likelier reason as to why books like that don't get approved for publishing is because they do little for society besides generate more resentment.

[Anonymous No.11595413]

>>11595402
But "kill the cracker we wuz kangz"-tier shit is somehow better and healing to the society? Come on, jewling.

[Anonymous No.11595425]

>>11595413
I've seen some "we wuz kangz" tier shit but nothing that includes killing whites. Also, not all publishing houses are owned by Jews. I'm sure that book could have been published if the author found a better agent.

[Anonymous No.11595469]

>>11595425
Give it up, there is no escape from the merchant and his minions (SPLC, ADL etc.) who will destroy and blacklist your company if you step out of the line too much.

[Anonymous No.11595484]

>>11595469

Wow, that is a concise, well-articulated, polite, and accurate description of the American literary scene from the 70s onward. Why, then, does my subconscious distrust of kikes persist?

[Anonymous No.11595500]

>>11595469
You're equating books that try to ennoble blacks with books that prosecute Jews. Why?

[Anonymous No.11595530]

>>11591254
>>11595322
eh I mean it partly is, when were our parents/grandparents asked if they ever wanted mass immigration clearly and openly by our governments? i don't recall there being a vote on this. of course now, many people go along with it and claim everything is fine, but that's past the point

[Anonymous No.11595546]

>>11587555
UK cuckservatives won 3 elections in a row with the promise to reduce immigration from hundreds of thousands to tens

It was in their manifesto 3 times, Cameron twice and the Sharia May.

Of course, they didn't deliver, because center right politicians are liars. Similarly Sarkozy did the same, Merkel too (last election included an immigration cap), Berlusconi etc.

Basically every center right party promised to curb immigration or at least lied enough to the electorare.

Find me one party that said ''we are pro immigration'' and won. ONE. None of them did. They all lied. Mostly said nothing and then opened borders

Now fuck off you lurid sack of lying shit. I hope you get run over by muslims.

[Anonymous No.11595556]

>>11587562
anyone using ''Putinist'' in an unironical way is a complete retard

go masturbate to your colluion fantasies

[Anonymous No.11595569]

>>11595530
>when were our parents/grandparents asked if they ever wanted mass immigration clearly and openly by our governments?
They always had an option to vote for anti-immigrant parties and never did. Eg the 2005 UK GE the tories ran an an explicit anti-immigrant campaign, and they were crushed like a bug by a Tony Blair who'd just invaded Iraq and was widely hated

[Anonymous No.11595570]

>>11595500
"The jew cries as he strikes you", the ur-post. How does that book prosecutes jews? By telling the facts? There is a good reason why jews shill minority and especially black authors. And it has nothing to do with "ennobling" them. Pic related.

[Anonymous No.11595574]

>>11587606
stop trying to reason with the multiculti crowd

they have been brainwashed and are unable to think logically

at this point the choice are two
we let the exterminate europeans
or we exterminate them first

[Anonymous No.11595582]

>>11595546
>'we are pro immigration'' and won. ONE
New Labour

[Anonymous No.11595596]

>>11592619
>went from 2 to 10%
>will be 30% in two decades at this rate
>but don't worry about it, you'll be fine with a muslim majority

you are a complete retard
seriously, we should just line you up and shot all of you

fucking traitors, liars, cowards, maniacs

who the fuck allowed you to ethnically cleanse european people?

[Anonymous No.11595608]

>>11595570
Jews do pull some shit sometimes, but come on. Jews are absolutely not behind the entire liberal movement in the West today like you make it sound. And liberals don't own the fucking planet, dude. They can bitch and whine all they want on Twitter, but people who aren't liberals still get things published all the time and still have their communities. The more you instigate the false notion that liberals own everything the more you will make it true.

[Anonymous No.11595610]

>>11595582
lol no

New Labour was ''there's no such thing as immigration policy'

Until documents came out (Jack Straw revelations) that there was indeed such thing as immigration policy by the Jewess (lol pol was right) Barbara Roche to make the UK ''diverse''.

So they lied to the electorare for a decade saying '' don't worry about it, it's not big enough to make a demographic change'' until everyone noticed

[Anonymous No.11595629]

>>11595596
Just because no-one fucks you doesn't mean Europeans are being ethnically cleansed. Besides, most Europeans are fuckwits anyway. I'd rather have a bunch of Nigerians than the average porthener morons. At least the Nigerians will do a good job when cleaning my kitchen. Why the fuck should I care about some dickhead from Middlesborough? He's nothing to me
>mfw provincial dolescum are getting outcompeted by fresh off the boat immigrants who don't even speak English

[Anonymous No.11595697]

>>11595610
From the 2005 manifesto:
>Building a strong and diverse country: For centuries Britain has been a home for people from the rest of Europe and further afield. Immigration has been good for Britain. We want to keep it that way. Our philosophy is simple: if you are ready to work hard and there is work for you to do, then you are welcome here.

[Anonymous No.11595709]

>>11595322
Immigration is consistently unpopular when polled. Not overwhelmingly so, but the majority is against the norm. I think I recall one poll being about 64%.

I think that's why elites are careful never to put a direct referendum on mass immigration. It's always paired with something like the entire EU.

[Anonymous No.11595747]

>>11595629
Nice bait. But you aren't going to get educated Nigerians, you are going to get the worst inbread pakis and other African horn mystery meat wonders. You don't have to give a fuck about anyone else, but you probably should care about yourself. Where do you even live, Murica?

[Anonymous No.11595756]

>>11595629
This.

But more importantly, a lot of white families have lived foolishly over the past several decades. They've grown lethargic and arrogant. They want to work less and get paid more. More importantly, they don't put themselves out for anyone. Immigrants started being brought in en masse because there appeared to be a drought of available (i.e. willing) workers. Whether that's true or not is irrelevant because that's what the data that backed the decision to bring in immigrants showed. Now people are paying the price for their procrastinating self-indulgent lifestyles with situations of terminal unemployment and getting outclassed by immigrants who have a far lower standard of living.

[Anonymous No.11595772]

>>11595747
>But you aren't going to get educated Nigerians, you are going to get the worst inbread pakis and other African horn mystery meat wonders
As I say, these people are not a significant step down from the average chav, with the added benefit of working harder. Racial solidarity is a meme for idiots who can't succeed in their own right

[Anonymous No.11595783]

>>11595756
Tell me about it. The British working class have fucked themselves over
>hurr durr, we want higher rate tax payers to continue to fund our lifestyles and support our families

[Anonymous No.11595829]

>>11595772
Judging by the crime stats, they are much worse. And you are wrong anyway, racial solidarity is for the winners, that's why jews are always the top. And that's how blacks took back South-Africa and Zimbabwe. By racial politics. Only atomized bugmen don't shamelessly practice blatant nepotism.

[Anonymous No.11595931]

>>11595596
>who the fuck allowed you to ethnically cleanse european people?
European people did desu

[Anonymous No.11597058]

>>11595772
Racial solidarity is a reality and well documented.
Even you are unconsciously biased in favor of your own kind.

[Anonymous No.11598203]

>>11587017
Of course.

[Anonymous No.11598532]

>>11595629
Enjoy getting raped then.

You deserve it. Seriously you deserve that your beloved Nigerians break into your house, rape your mother and sister (not your girlfriend because you sack of shit don't have any) and then have fun torturing you so that you atone colonialism. Also the police won't believe you when you report it.

Also
>nigerians
>cleaning

Just look at their shitty country. The idea that third world immigrants are somehow more hard-working than locals is thoroughly disproven in the book, considering they are a net drain on welfare. They don't do shit, just like you don't do shit you fucking lying piece of garbage.

[Anonymous No.11598552]

>>11595697
>2005
And that's the last time an openly pro-immigration party won

meanwhile
>We would like to see net immigration in the tens of thousands rather than the hundreds of thousands.

Tory manifesto 2010, 2015, 2017

Please tell me more about anti-immigration parties never winning while pro-immigration parties winning.

Btw, where's the center-left in Europe now?
France? From 50% to 6%.
Netherlands? From 36 to 6%.
Italy? From 40 to 18%.
Germany? From 32 to 17%
UK? Labour hasn't won since 2005 indeed.

How does it feel to be wiped out from history?
>''Pro-immigration parties are winning''
The only reason they are still around is that they have lied so far. Now that's becoming evident that multiculturalism simply means ethnic cleansing, people are waking up. You are going on trial for attepted genocide dude. There's no stopping this. You guys will end up in jail for the rest of your lives, and if you push it further we'll bring back the death sentence.

[Anonymous No.11598597]

>>11595629
>muh toilet
vs
reality

[Anonymous No.11598602]

>>11595629
>hello we are here to clean your toilet mr leftcuck

[Anonymous No.11598604]

>>11595629
>thank you for welcoming to your homeland, here's what you get

[Anonymous No.11598610]

>>11598604
file

[Anonymous No.11598614]

>>11595629
vibrant and diverse!

[Anonymous No.11598621]

>>11598597
>>11598602
>>11598610
>>11598614
I don't disagree with your point, but that's not how you persuade a basedboy. He simply doesn't experience that violence first hand, so it "doesn't affect him". That's just how individualist-minded people think. As long as they can play on their Nintendo Switch in their room they're happy.

[Anonymous No.11598626]

>>11587751
>No sane person wishes to completely ban immigration. People like it and vote accordingly
Only because they've been led to believe that it's a necessity when that's a patent lie

[Anonymous No.11598656]

>>11595629
>I support immigration because I don't like hearing my slaves speak
Unsurprising revelation

[Anonymous No.11598790]

>>11598532
>implying scally fuckwits don't rob and steal.
The average provincial English chavscum is essentially identical to a third world immigrant, though the immigrant probably has better language skills. You people are feral orcs and your bleating is delicious. What have you got to offer the higher rate taxpayers who fund your lives? Nothing. So why should we be loyal to you over foreigners? The world is a tough place and you are not owed a living or a homeland

[Anonymous No.11598882]

>>11598790
Because they are your kin you Globalist bastard.

[Anonymous No.11598889]

>>11598882
>please pretend you belong to my imaginary community

[Anonymous No.11598919]

>>11595783
Thats because the EU bribed your countries into disbanding part of your economies.

local farmers and fishermen get paid to dump the products they produce. They cant export them and thus they live from goverment payouts. But now the goverment depends from EU gibs to sustain the gibs distributed to the people.

A fucking scam to make people dependant of big goverment . And then sobs like you blame the working class instead of parasitic politicians while praising muh nigerian immigrants instead of caring for your own people.

[Anonymous No.11598925]

>>11598889
>what is a nation
>what is a people
>what is ethnicity
>what is folk lore
>what is folk

[Anonymous No.11599015]

>>11598925
All spooks

[Anonymous No.11599127]

>>11599015
>the absolute state of /lit/

[Anonymous No.11599138]

>>11599127
Not an argument

[Anonymous No.11599184]

>>11598925
All of those things were made up in the 19th century to encourage the working classes to fight in the interests of capital.

[Anonymous No.11599186]

>>11599184
this is what marxists actually believe

[Anonymous No.11599198]

>>11599184
>wtf people created terms that applied to preconcieved notions wtf

[Anonymous No.11599221]

>>11598597
>>11598602
>>11598610
Seems like Yuropoors need to man the fuck up. They've been living in peaceful times for far too long. I mean, how the fuck do you let someone jump on your car like that?

[Anonymous No.11599227]

>>11599015
>>11599138
>>11599184

>tribalist instincts (which can already be observed in primitve tribes); cultural, linguistic, and ethnic solidarity/identity were all invented by le bourgeoisie to subdue le worker XD
>muh class-reductionist historiography
>stop having non-material needs
>if you care more about preserving your own culture than about the well being of some random blacks and arabs who you don't know then you suffer from a "false consciousness" and must be reeducated in a proper marxist way

you people always amuse me with your dogmatic and narrowminded worldview

[Anonymous No.11599247]

>>11587017
He is 100% right.

Europe is committing suicide and will be unrecognizable in another generation.

[Anonymous No.11599425]

>>11595556
Haven't used it in relation to your meme country. Putinism manifests itself domestically through its own brand of populism and internationally with countries other than burgerland. Putin existed before he was brought to your attention by your latest presidential pageant.

[Anonymous No.11599436]

>>11599227

Spooky.

[Anonymous No.11599612]

>>11599227
>my made up memes are more authentic than made up Marxist memes
>if you don't fall for the nationalism bullshit you are suffering from false consciousness
>everyone who hasn't fallen for the race meme is an big poopy globalist
You people always amuse me with your dogmatic and narrowminded worldview

[Anonymous No.11599958]

>>11599612
>if you don't fall for the nationalism bullshit you are suffering from false consciousness
>everyone who hasn't fallen for the race meme is an big poopy globalist
never said that. I just pointed out how ridiculous the marxist point of view is that non-material "reactionary" instincts and needs (like wanting to live among people who speak your own language and share your culture) are fake and should be discarded and supressed in order to realize your "true material needs"

>my made up memes are more authentic than made up Marxist memes
tribalism and nepotism are surely more authentic (and ingrained in us on a biological level) than international worker solidarity and egalitarianism. If it were the other way around we would already live in a socialist world republic by now.

[Anonymous No.11599987]

>>11598889
>Communities don't real
Why should a government not make protecting its citizens the primary goal.

[Anonymous No.11600121]

>>11599987
That's precisely the reason immigration is encouraged, because it benefits the citizens. You retarded white nationalists don't understand how economies work.
>>11599958
You need to make a better effort to understand Marxism, it isn't difficult. Then you'd understand why immigration isn't as big an issue as money. Only retarded white nationalists like you care about it

[Anonymous No.11600144]

>>11599958
ok wait a minute, if people have some "non-material instinct" to live among "their own culture" then why do migrants go to countries that don't share their language or culture just to improve their material conditions? if your idea were true there would be no migration

[Anonymous No.11600177]

>>11599958
>like wanting to live among people who speak your own language and share your culture
What culture? Going to the pub every day and eating chips is not a culture

[Anonymous No.11601640]

>>11600121
>That's precisely the reason immigration is encouraged, because it benefits the citizens. You retarded white nationalists don't understand how economies work.
>You need to make a better effort to understand Marxism, it isn't difficult. Then you'd understand why immigration isn't as big an issue as money. Only retarded white nationalists like you care about it
It always irked me how Marxists always arrange and define the world under a capitalist lense. How can people that blame the capitalist system only view the world under those terms? Dividing society and individuals by the value of their bank accounts rather than their common origin/history. Its like they see capitalism everywhere they go and divide people in those terms.

Peoples, Nations , families , genders, traditions and culture dont exist for them as these terms do not mean anything from a capitalist standpoint, as in they are not useful to perpetuate a capitalist world; ergo this definitions must be made to fit into the capitalist worldview. In this way they can be twisted and used against the society as they prevent marxism from coming into being.

The Axis Mundi of Marxists is Capitalism. They do not fight against it, they fight for it. Anything that can't be defined by it does not exist and hence why they reject ethnicity, religion, culture and science but accept them as commodities, thats the deal behind "cultural Marxism"; subvert life itself and transmute it into capital so that both become the same.Thats the force behind multiculturalism, gender studies, feminism, neo-liberal policies and supranational entities.

That is the goal of Globalism.

[Anonymous No.11602618]

>>11592659
>becoming Brazil
Brazil didn't have a hostile immigrant population (although a point could be made that every immigrant is potentially hostile). Also, Brazil had no religious tension like Europe is witnessing now. This is why Brazil became a mestizo country with relatively low tension (and tension is very different from violence). Europe, on the other hand seems to be following a path that will inevitably lead to internal, domestic conflicts in which there is a clear cut division between the opposing sides (Muslim rapes Aryan girl, for example) while in Brazil it just becomes "mutt kills mutt"

[Anonymous No.11602721]

>>11587017
(((lit))) for pussies afraid of better brown people on the bus, the bus headed for the real source of their problems.

[Anonymous No.11602735]

>>11600177
>What culture? Going to the pub every day and eating chips is not a culture
Imagine honestly believing this. What do they know of England, who only England know?

[Anonymous No.11602892]

>>11600177
what is culture?

[Anonymous No.11603163]

>>11600177
You'll never get a serious response to that question because no one here is serious about the subject. They're just here to parrot memes.

[Anonymous No.11603183]

>>11602892
The language, styles, arts, and other things unique to a group is that groups culture

[Anonymous No.11603199]

>>11587430
>yeh da foreign slaves wll mk us ipads n nikes fr cheapsies. iz 2015 an doze brothas dey so swagg do too bro, amirite?

Having this opinion doesn't make you an intelligent urban professional mate, it just makes you white trash of the neoliberal variety. Rural conservative hicks have fox news, you have msnbc or the British equivalent.

[Anonymous No.11603211]

>>11602735
It's a standard response. Morons are so used to their own culture and never have exposure to others so they don't understand what their culture entails. Leftists in Japan always talk about how Japan has no history, no culture, so Japan needs to do away with its culture and history to help fuel the consumption of luxuries.

I use Japan because it's an extreme example: Few Westerners would agree with the statement that Japan lacks a culture even though they say it about themselves.

[Anonymous No.11603234]

>>11599958
>tribalism and nepotism are surely more authentic (and ingrained in us on a biological level) than international worker solidarity and egalitarianism. If it were the other way around we would already live in a socialist world republic by now.
And here's the elephant in the room that no one wants to address.