Jump to content

Is there an agenda to reduce the White European population?


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Macnamara said:

is a government that cares about us going to be able to always creates a one size fits all solution to everything?

 

I think you make a fair point there. Is no government or no grouping up any better though? Who would protect the vulnerable in a free for all society?

 

And a society where people have so many competing cultures and ideologies certainly doesn't make things easier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Macnamara said:

 

what they should be defending is the truth and peoples natural law rights so that those are upheld as the common law

 

this would then ensure freedom for the many

 

I think that's probably the best solution if we're going to live in a society without philia. Just make it so everyone has the same rights and freedoms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, EnigmaticWorld said:

I think you make a fair point there. Is no government or no grouping up any better though? Who would protect the vulnerable in a free for all society?

 

as soon as you start making that argument where does it end? do you want government to decide what you can get to eat?

 

so really a defining aspect of collectivism is COERCION. Individualism on the other hand might want some of the same things that collectivists want but they believe it should be done through persuasion and example

 

8 minutes ago, EnigmaticWorld said:

And a society where people have so many competing cultures and ideologies certainly doesn't make things easier.

 

that's why the collectivists have done that. They want chaos so that they can argue ''look only an all powerful government (run by them) can solve these problems''

 

that's why they are creating a perfect storm of problems: to coerce everyone into accepting the ultimate expression of their mindset: the TECHNOCRACY

Edited by Macnamara
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, EnigmaticWorld said:

And a society where people have so many competing cultures and ideologies certainly doesn't make things easier.

 

lets not forget who really got that mass immigration ball rolling: the collectivist tony blair who also wanted everyone to have ID cards and who is now pushing for everyone to be jabbed and to have vaccine passports

 

and what did tony blair do when he left politics? he was given a job at the rockefeller bank JP morgan chase which is one of the shareholders of the cartel behind the collectivist federal reserve bank (which is neither 'federal' as its a cartel of private banks nor is it a 'reserve' as it keeps nothing on deposit)

 

he also took us into war in iraq as he had no respect for the territorial sovereignty of the iraqi people nor their right to a fair price for their oil

Edited by Macnamara
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

lets not forget who really got that mass immigration ball rolling: the collectivist tony blair who also wanted everyone to have ID cards and who is now pushing for everyone to be jabbed and to have vaccine passports

 

Collectivists for POC maybe. New Labour abandoned the white working class, and said that they were going to rub the Right's faces in diversity.

Edited by EnigmaticWorld
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

 

well they are the global majority so the collectivists could argue that white people need to go 'for the greater good'....

 

that's how collectivism works

 

So some people grouped up and did a bad thing, therefore all grouping up is bad. I don't follow, but I like you, and I think we'll have to just agree to disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, EnigmaticWorld said:

So some people grouped up and did a bad thing, therefore all grouping up is bad. I don't follow, but I like you, and I think we'll have to just agree to disagree.

 

no i don't think its about 'grouping up' i think its about whether or not you believe that a group can do you harm under the excuse that they are acting in the 'greater good' by doing that

 

this is a very real issue for us as unjabbed people in the covid era and as white people in a woke world

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

 

as soon as you start making that argument where does it end?  of their mindset: the TECHNOCRACY

 

Sorry, I just noticed this. It ends with common sense if you had a government that didn't hate you. The governments job shouldn't be to tell you how to live your life, just to protect your freedom as an individual so you can live your life and be left alone. Collectivism doesn't even have to mean government. It could just be people coming together to help each other. Take care.

Edited by EnigmaticWorld
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

 

no i don't think its about 'grouping up' i think its about whether or not you believe that a group can do you harm under the excuse that they are acting in the 'greater good' by doing that

 

this is a very real issue for us as unjabbed people in the covid era and as white people in a woke world

 

That goes both ways. They also do things to stop us organizing and protecting the unjabbed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, EnigmaticWorld said:

Collectivism doesn't even have to mean government. It could just be people coming together to help each other.

 

lets say that you organise a militia that goes out in motorboats into the channel to defend our territory from being invaded and you peacefully prevent any boats from coming over here by impeding their access to our waters. Lets say you were always careful that no one got hurt but neither did they get to take the piss

 

what would happen?

Edited by Macnamara
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

4 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

 

that's individualism

 

It's individualism protected by a group effort.

 

5 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

 

the important thing is WHY you organise in defence: because you are defending your inalienable rights

 

Or because your people are under attack.

 

Or because the unjabbed have been made to distance themselves from each other with technocratic surveillance, which can also be used to stop people coming together for non-Covid related issues.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Macnamara said:

 

lets say that you organise a militia that goes out in motorboats into the channel to defend our territory from being invaded and you peacefully prevent any boats from coming over here by impeding their access to our waters. Lets say you were always careful that no one got hurt but neither did they get to take the piss

 

what would happen?

 

Why not just stop any incentive for them to come here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, EnigmaticWorld said:

It's individualism protected by a group effort.

 

so was the american republic which then got subverted from within and without by the collectivist banksters. The question is whether or not enough people will now stand up against them

 

3 minutes ago, EnigmaticWorld said:

Or because your people are under attack.

 

boils down to the same thing

 

3 minutes ago, EnigmaticWorld said:

Or because the unjabbed have been made to distance themselves from each other with technocratic surveillance, which can also be used to stop people coming together for non-Covid related issues.

 

by globalised collectivists who are already beginning to make arguments in academia and culture that white people need to go 'for the greater good'. They are also trying to get rid of the american constitution and on this side of the pond they are trying to ride rough shod over the british constitution

Edited by Macnamara
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, EnigmaticWorld said:

 

Why not just stop any incentive for them to come here?

 

the incentive for them to come is that collectivism says we must take money from these productive working people over here in order to give it to these freeloaders over here

 

the super rich meanwhile dodge this by keeping their wealth offshore out of reach of the taxman through a global tax avoidance network centred in the city of london

 

now if you WANT to help people then that's great and i think people SHOULD do that under their own initiative. But should the government COERCE you into handing over the fruits of your labour and will they then use them responsibly or will they just be a bunch of pedo-satanist degenerates?

Edited by Macnamara
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Macnamara said:

 

right! The globalised, collectivist british government would arrest you and persecute you

 

Yeah, I hear you. I don't get why that means a better governmnent would have the same issue though. Obviously it's all conditional because a party that cares about us won't be allowed to run for government.

 

This is not an argument against all form of collectivism though, just the government that currently we have.

 

I do understand the concerns about where we should draw the line on certain things if we did have a different government though.

 

I also understand peoples concerns about no government, because then might becomes right, and the strongest will just dominate the rest if there was a free for all. The irony is that mobs would form which is also collectivism, no?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

But should the government COERCE you into handing over the fruits of your labour and will they then use them responsibly or will they just be a bunch of pedo-satanist degenerates?

 

I don't believe in coercion. I'm pro-private property too. Could we not just have more transparency in this hypothetical government, so we can keep tabs on them and make sure that they're not freaks that hate us?

 

Could we not counter subversive anti-white press with wholesome press that teaches people why things are degenerate and destructive?

 

There are plenty of things that could be done. The problem is that multiple nations need to wake up together. If one country wakes up on it's own and goes against the internationalists, then elites will just pit other nations against it.

Edited by EnigmaticWorld
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, EnigmaticWorld said:

 The irony is that mobs would form which is also collectivism, no?

 

i don't think collectivism is about people coming together into groups

 

i think it is a mindset that believes that the rights of individuals can be trampled for 'the greater good'

 

but who gets to decide what is the greater good?

 

for example we currently have covid-cultists who want EVERYONE to be jabbed even if it means being done against their will and the way in which they justify that is that they say that our 'freedom be damned' if it means putting their health at risk. You can even hear celebs like arnie scharznegger saying that. They believe that your freedom can be discarded at a drop of a hat if they see fit. But what if they are wrong? For example what if they have over-estmated the threat to their health?

 

we also have people arguing that white people are the problem in the world and must be gotten rid of for the good of the greater number of non whites

 

THATS collectivism. Now under natural law you have a right to defend yourself against their efforts to trample on your natural law rights and if that means working with others who are also defending their natural law rights then that is ok.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, EnigmaticWorld said:

I don't believe in coercion. I'm pro-private property too. Could we not just have more transparency in this hypothetical government, so we can keep tabs on them and make sure that they're not freaks that hate us?

 

so if you believe people should do no harm, not damage other peoples property and honour their contracts then that is in a nutshell the common law

 

some people argue government should only exist to uphold that and some people believe it should only exist to ensure people honour their contracts and some people believe there should be no government at all

 

But at the moment we are watching fire brigades spending £17,000 to paint their fire trucks with LGBT rainbow colours

 

Now do you think the fire brigade should be pushing social engineering or do you think they should stick exclusively to fighting fires?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

i don't think collectivism is about people coming together into groups

 

i think it is a mindset that believes that the rights of individuals can be trampled for 'the greater good'

 

That's the socialist theory of collectivism, and I can understand why people don't want that. What I'm talking about is defending the 'collective', which can't be done alone.

Edited by EnigmaticWorld
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...