Skip to Content

Register
Log-in
Search
- The Free Speech / Pro White Wiki
- Page Index
- User Index
- Global
- What's New
- Wiki Index

0.0
1
2
3
4
5

0 Votes

Changes for page Common Arguments

Last modified by Ryan C on 2025/08/18 01:13

From 30.1 to 29.1 From 31.3 to 31.2

From version

edited by Ryan C
on 2025/08/18 00:52

Change comment: There is no comment for this version

To version

edited by Ryan C
on 2025/08/18 00:20

Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Raw
Rendered

Summary

Page properties (1 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)

Details

Page properties

Content

@@ -32,7 +32,7 @@
  ## Relevant Studies##
--* [[Rushton2005>>attach:Main Categories.Science & Research.Research at a Glance.Studies\: IQ.WebHome@rushton2005 OCR.pdf]]
++* [[Rushton2005>>attach:Main Categories.Science & Research.Research at a Glance.Studies\: IQ.WebHome@rushton2005 OCR.pdf]]
  **Rebuttal:**
@@ -60,556 +60,362 @@
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="You just hate people who don't look like you."}}
--**Claim:** Advocacy for Whites is rooted in hatred toward other races.
++**Claim:** Advocacy for Whites is rooted in hatred toward other races.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* If hatred were the goal, it would involve destroying other races, not defending one’s own.
++* It is White people being targeted with demographic flooding, not others.
++* Preservation of one’s group is not equivalent to hate for others.
--* If hatred were the goal, it would involve destroying other races, not defending one’s own.
--* It is White people being targeted with demographic flooding, not others.
--* Preservation of one’s group is not equivalent to hate for others.
--
  **Explanation:**
  Saying “you just hate people who don’t look like you” is a strawman. White advocates are not asking for the destruction of others, but for the right of their own group to survive. True hatred would look like conquest or erasure of others. The reality is that anti-White policies are creating conditions that erase Whites, and pointing that out is survival, not hate.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="We don’t demand that the whole world be white."}}
--**Claim:** Whites demand that everyone assimilate into whiteness.
++**Claim:** Whites demand that everyone assimilate into whiteness.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* Whites are not demanding the elimination of other peoples.
++* It is anti-Whites who demand that every White nation becomes non-White.
++* The double standard exposes who is really forcing assimilation.
--* Whites are not demanding the elimination of other peoples.
--* It is anti-Whites who demand that every White nation becomes non-White.
--* The double standard exposes who is really forcing assimilation.
--
  **Explanation:**
  White advocacy is about preservation, not conquest. Anti-Whites constantly invert the accusation, pretending that Whites want the whole world to be White, when in reality Whites only ask for the right to maintain their own homelands and identity. The demand for a non-White world is entirely one-sided.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="No one's forcing assimilation."}}
--**Claim:** Intermixing happens voluntarily, not by force.
++**Claim:** Intermixing happens voluntarily, not by force.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* White communities are denied the freedom to remain White-only.
++* Legal, cultural, and economic pressure enforces forced integration.
++* UN law defines genocide as including coerced conditions of destruction.
--* White communities are denied the freedom to remain White-only.
--* Legal, cultural, and economic pressure enforces forced integration.
--* UN law defines genocide as including coerced conditions of destruction.
--
  **Explanation:**
  The argument that “no one’s forcing” ignores the reality: every White nation is pressured through laws, policies, and propaganda to accept mass immigration and assimilation. Under UN Resolution 260, deliberately creating conditions that erase a people is genocide, regardless of whether it involves direct violence.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="Have more babies."}}
--**Claim:** Whites can solve the problem of replacement by reproducing more.
++**Claim:** Whites can solve the problem of replacement by reproducing more.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* Telling one group to “breed or die” while enforcing policies that erase them is genocidal.
++* Declining fertility does not justify importing tens of millions of non-Whites.
++* The argument itself admits that genocidal conditions are in place.
--* Telling one group to “breed or die” while enforcing policies that erase them is genocidal.
--* Declining fertility does not justify importing tens of millions of non-Whites.
--* The argument itself admits that genocidal conditions are in place.
--
  **Explanation:**
  Birth rates fluctuate throughout history, but no other people is told their fertility justifies their eradication. Whites are uniquely targeted with policies that replace them under the excuse of “low birth rates.” This reveals genocidal intent.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="America is a nation of immigrants."}}
--**Claim:** America is uniquely a “nation of immigrants,” so mass migration today is natural.
++**Claim:** America is uniquely a “nation of immigrants,” so mass migration today is natural.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* Every nation has ancestors who came from elsewhere. That does not erase national identity.
++* Immigration is not unique to America and does not justify replacement of the founding stock.
++* The phrase is used selectively to push anti-White policies.
--* Every nation has ancestors who came from elsewhere. That does not erase national identity.
--* Immigration is not unique to America and does not justify replacement of the founding stock.
--* The phrase is used selectively to push anti-White policies.
--
  **Explanation:**
  Saying America is a “nation of immigrants” is rhetorical sleight of hand. It ignores that every people originated somewhere. What matters is who founded and built the country. Immigration today is not the same as nation-building, and it does not justify White genocide.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="Stop trying to divide us."}}
--**Claim:** Talking about race is what creates division.
++**Claim:** Talking about race is what creates division.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* Multiracial societies are inherently divided along racial lines.
++* Those who flood White countries with mass immigration are responsible for division.
++* The more diversity, the more racial politics dominates.
--* Multiracial societies are inherently divided along racial lines.
--* Those who flood White countries with mass immigration are responsible for division.
--* The more diversity, the more racial politics dominates.
--
  **Explanation:**
  Blaming Whites for “division” reverses cause and effect. Division arises because diversity is imposed on Whites against their will. Every multiracial society demonstrates that racial conflict is inevitable when groups with competing interests are forced together.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="Identity politics is the problem."}}
--**Claim:** Political conflict comes from identity politics, not immigration.
++**Claim:** Political conflict comes from identity politics, not immigration.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* All politics in multiracial countries becomes identity politics.
++* Non-Whites are loyal to their groups; only Whites are told not to be.
++* Diversity is what drives identity politics.
--* All politics in multiracial countries becomes identity politics.
--* Non-Whites are loyal to their groups; only Whites are told not to be.
--* Diversity is what drives identity politics.
--
  **Explanation:**
  It is dishonest to blame identity politics itself, while ignoring the cause: forced diversity. When you mix peoples with different interests, politics becomes tribal. Whites are singled out as the only group forbidden to defend themselves while everyone else is encouraged to practice group loyalty.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="Hate speech is not free speech."}}
--**Claim:** Restricting “hate speech” protects society.
++**Claim:** Restricting “hate speech” protects society.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* Every tyranny justifies censorship by labeling dissent as dangerous.
++* The current anti-White system censors truth under the guise of “hate.”
++* Free speech protections were meant for unpopular opinions, not state-approved ones.
--* Every tyranny justifies censorship by labeling dissent as dangerous.
--* The current anti-White system censors truth under the guise of “hate.”
--* Free speech protections were meant for unpopular opinions, not state-approved ones.
--
  **Explanation:**
  Calling speech “hate” is a tool of repression. It is not about safety, but about silencing opposition to anti-White policies. Censorship is always framed as moral, but its effect is to protect the reigning power and punish dissent.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="One brown person down the street isn't genocide."}}
--**Claim:** Genocide is exaggerated because a single non-White doesn’t constitute a threat.
++**Claim:** Genocide is exaggerated because a single non-White doesn’t constitute a threat.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* No one argues that one person equals genocide.
++* The issue is mass immigration plus forced assimilation in every White country.
++* Strawman arguments are used to distract from the real claim.
--* No one argues that one person equals genocide.
--* The issue is mass immigration plus forced assimilation in every White country.
--* Strawman arguments are used to distract from the real claim.
--
  **Explanation:**
  Anti-Whites misrepresent the position deliberately. The argument is not about individuals but about demographic replacement through policy. Under international law, coordinated replacement policies meet the definition of genocide. Pretending it’s about “one person” is dishonest deflection.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="Genocide means killing. Whites aren't being killed."}}
--**Claim:** Genocide only applies to physical mass killings.
++**Claim:** Genocide only applies to physical mass killings.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* UN law defines genocide to include deliberate conditions of destruction, not just killing.
++* Forced assimilation and mass immigration fall under this definition.
++* Historical precedent (Raphael Lemkin’s definition) explicitly included non-lethal methods.
--* UN law defines genocide to include deliberate conditions of destruction, not just killing.
--* Forced assimilation and mass immigration fall under this definition.
--* Historical precedent (Raphael Lemkin’s definition) explicitly included non-lethal methods.
--
  **Explanation:**
  Genocide is not limited to killing. UN Resolution 260 and Lemkin’s own words include sterilization, displacement, and policies designed to erase a group’s identity and existence. Anti-White policies meet this definition precisely.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="No one's chasing you down."}}
--**Claim:** Whites can still live separately if they choose.
++**Claim:** Whites can still live separately if they choose.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* Any attempt by Whites to form their own communities is targeted and dismantled.
++* Segregation laws and “anti-discrimination” policies prevent White-only spaces.
++* Whites uniquely are not allowed to escape enforced diversity.
--* Any attempt by Whites to form their own communities is targeted and dismantled.
--* Segregation laws and “anti-discrimination” policies prevent White-only spaces.
--* Whites uniquely are not allowed to escape enforced diversity.
--
  **Explanation:**
  While other groups can live together, any White attempt to do the same is criminalized or attacked. From zoning restrictions to lawsuits, the message is clear: no escape from “diversity.” That is coercion.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="We all came from a common ancestor."}}
--**Claim:** Since all humans share a common ancestor, race is irrelevant.
++**Claim:** Since all humans share a common ancestor, race is irrelevant.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* Shared origins do not justify present-day eradication.
++* By this logic, any genocide could be excused by tracing ancestry back far enough.
++* Distinctions between groups are real and present, regardless of ultimate origin.
--* Shared origins do not justify present-day eradication.
--* By this logic, any genocide could be excused by tracing ancestry back far enough.
--* Distinctions between groups are real and present, regardless of ultimate origin.
--
  **Explanation:**
  Appealing to a “common ancestor” is not an argument against genocide. Every living creature has a distant common origin, but that does not negate the rights of distinct groups to exist today. Using this argument selectively against Whites is dishonest.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="You're inbred."}}
--**Claim:** Whites are genetically damaged due to inbreeding.
++**Claim:** Whites are genetically damaged due to inbreeding.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* Every subspecies, breed, and race arises from mutations and selective in-group reproduction.
++* Inbreeding accusations are never used as a justification for eliminating other groups.
++* Whites number in the hundreds of millions — the idea they are “inbred” is absurd.
--* Every subspecies, breed, and race arises from mutations and selective in-group reproduction.
--* Inbreeding accusations are never used as a justification for eliminating other groups.
--* Whites number in the hundreds of millions — the idea they are “inbred” is absurd.
--
  **Explanation:**
  “Inbred” is a smear, not a scientific argument. All populations display in-group reproduction at some stage. Yet only Whites are told this somehow justifies their elimination. The accusation is propaganda, not biology.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="You can't control who people love."}}
--**Claim:** Intermarriage is only about free choice and love.
++**Claim:** Intermarriage is only about free choice and love.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* Mass immigration plus forced assimilation ensures intermarriage happens under engineered conditions.
++* Love is not an argument for demographic replacement programs.
++* Claiming “love” as justification ignores the coercive context of White erasure.
--* Mass immigration plus forced assimilation ensures intermarriage happens under engineered conditions.
--* Love is not an argument for demographic replacement programs.
--* Claiming “love” as justification ignores the coercive context of White erasure.
--
  **Explanation:**
  If an individual cannot find a partner within their own billion-strong population, that is a personal issue, not a justification for policies that eliminate an entire race. To pretend the White genocide program is “just love” is absurd.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="I can't be anti-White. I'm White."}}
--**Claim:** Whites cannot be anti-White.
++**Claim:** Whites cannot be anti-White.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* Betrayal is possible within any group — traitors have existed in every nation.
++* Being White does not exempt one from enacting anti-White policies.
++* Many Whites are incentivized to oppose their own group through social and financial pressure.
--* Betrayal is possible within any group — traitors have existed in every nation.
--* Being White does not exempt one from enacting anti-White policies.
--* Many Whites are incentivized to oppose their own group through social and financial pressure.
--
  **Explanation:**
  Claiming identity shields one from betrayal is nonsensical. A White person who works to dismantle White survival is still anti-White. By definition, that is treachery.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="Go back to Europe."}}
--**Claim:** Whites in America should return to Europe.
++**Claim:** Whites in America should return to Europe.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* Europe is also being flooded with non-Whites.
++* Every nation was founded by conquest — if Whites must “go back,” then all other groups must as well.
++* Telling Whites to leave their own creation is hypocrisy.
--* Europe is also being flooded with non-Whites.
--* Every nation was founded by conquest — if Whites must “go back,” then all other groups must as well.
--* Telling Whites to leave their own creation is hypocrisy.
--
  **Explanation:**
--If hating Japanese doesn’t mean leaving Japan, and hating Blacks doesn’t mean leaving Africa, then hating Whites doesn’t mean they must leave America. Whites built these nations; they have as much right to remain as anyone.
++If hating Japanese doesn’t mean leaving Japan, and hating Blacks doesn’t mean leaving Africa, then hating Whites doesn’t mean they must leave America. Whites built these nations; they have as much right to remain as anyone.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="America was founded on the proposition that all men are created equal."}}
--**Claim:** America’s founding documents establish universal equality.
++**Claim:** America’s founding documents establish universal equality.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* The Declaration of Independence was wartime propaganda aimed at Europe.
++* The U.S. Constitution — the actual founding law — makes no mention of equality.
++* The stated purpose of America is securing liberty for “ourselves and our posterity.”
--* The Declaration of Independence was wartime propaganda aimed at Europe.
--* The U.S. Constitution — the actual founding law — makes no mention of equality.
--* The stated purpose of America is securing liberty for “ourselves and our posterity.”
--
  **Explanation:**
  America’s real foundation is not abstract equality but the preservation of its people. The Constitution’s preamble is explicit about posterity. Claiming universal equality as the founding purpose is revisionism.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="It's our values that matter."}}
--**Claim:** Shared values, not shared ancestry, define civilization.
++**Claim:** Shared values, not shared ancestry, define civilization.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* Values arise from the genetic and cultural foundations of a people.
++* Remove the people, and the values eventually collapse.
++* No people can outsource their civilization without destroying it.
--* Values arise from the genetic and cultural foundations of a people.
--* Remove the people, and the values eventually collapse.
--* No people can outsource their civilization without destroying it.
--
  **Explanation:**
  Civilization is a racial construct. White values come from the White gene pool. If White people vanish, so do their values. Pretending values float independently of people is naïve.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="It's 2018! The White population is growing so there can't be a White genocide."}}
--**Claim:** Whites are not disappearing, so genocide claims are exaggerated.
++**Claim:** Whites are not disappearing, so genocide claims are exaggerated.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* Anti-Whites admit they push immigration because Whites “aren’t having enough children.”
++* Genocide is defined by the attempt, not just the final outcome.
++* Attempted genocide is still genocide under UN law.
--* Anti-Whites admit they push immigration because Whites “aren’t having enough children.”
--* Genocide is defined by the attempt, not just the final outcome.
--* Attempted genocide is still genocide under UN law.
--
  **Explanation:**
  Whites may not yet be fully eliminated, but the policies are in place and openly defended. Attempted genocide is still a crime, and demographic replacement shows clear intent.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="We know what your kind of talk led to in the 30's."}}
--**Claim:** Discussing White survival inevitably leads to another Holocaust.
++**Claim:** Discussing White survival inevitably leads to another Holocaust.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* No historical event justifies genocide against Whites today.
++* If past atrocities justified elimination, then Turks, Japanese, and countless others would also be targeted.
++* The argument is selective and hypocritical.
--* No historical event justifies genocide against Whites today.
--* If past atrocities justified elimination, then Turks, Japanese, and countless others would also be targeted.
--* The argument is selective and hypocritical.
--
  **Explanation:**
  Past crimes of some groups are never used to justify their eradication. Only Whites are told their history means they must die. That double standard exposes the anti-White agenda.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="I'm not anti-White. I'm pro-humanity."}}
--**Claim:** Advocating for humanity as a whole cannot be anti-White.
++**Claim:** Advocating for humanity as a whole cannot be anti-White.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* “Humanity” is an abstraction; real loyalty is to concrete groups.
++* Supporting policies that eliminate Whites while claiming to be “pro-humanity” is hypocrisy.
++* Other groups are never told loyalty to their own people is anti-human.
--* “Humanity” is an abstraction; real loyalty is to concrete groups.
--* Supporting policies that eliminate Whites while claiming to be “pro-humanity” is hypocrisy.
--* Other groups are never told loyalty to their own people is anti-human.
--
  **Explanation:**
  Claiming to be “pro-humanity” while supporting White genocide is contradictory. Humanity is not loyal to you; groups are loyal to their kin. Denying Whites the same loyalty every other people practices is anti-White by definition.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="It's a demographic shift."}}
--**Claim:** White replacement is just a natural demographic change.
++**Claim:** White replacement is just a natural demographic change.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* Deliberate government policy is driving this shift, not random chance.
++* Calling genocide a “shift” is a rhetorical trick to normalize it.
++* No one describes other genocides as mere “demographics.”
--* Deliberate government policy is driving this shift, not random chance.
--* Calling genocide a “shift” is a rhetorical trick to normalize it.
--* No one describes other genocides as mere “demographics.”
--
  **Explanation:**
  Labeling White genocide as “demographic change” hides intent. Forced immigration and assimilation are policies, not accidents. Euphemisms cannot erase the fact that deliberate engineering of population destruction is genocide.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="They just need to assimilate."}}
--**Claim:** Non-Whites can simply assimilate into White societies.
++**Claim:** Non-Whites can simply assimilate into White societies.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* Assimilation is often code for intermarriage, which eliminates Whites genetically.
++* “Acting White” is not the same as being White.
++* Large numbers of non-Whites inevitably bring their own group identities and behaviors.
--* Assimilation is often code for intermarriage, which eliminates Whites genetically.
--* “Acting White” is not the same as being White.
--* Large numbers of non-Whites inevitably bring their own group identities and behaviors.
--
  **Explanation:**
  The idea of assimilation is flawed. Cultural mimicry does not change biological identity, and mass assimilation into Whites means no Whites remain. This is erasure disguised as tolerance.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="The brown future is inevitable."}}
--**Claim:** White replacement is unavoidable, so resistance is pointless.
++**Claim:** White replacement is unavoidable, so resistance is pointless.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* Declaring inevitability is a psychological tactic to demoralize resistance.
++* History is full of “inevitable” predictions proven wrong (Communism, EU integration, etc.).
++* The claim admits openly that replacement is intentional.
--* Declaring inevitability is a psychological tactic to demoralize resistance.
--* History is full of “inevitable” predictions proven wrong (Communism, EU integration, etc.).
--* The claim admits openly that replacement is intentional.
--
  **Explanation:**
  Telling Whites their elimination is “inevitable” is both an admission and a propaganda tactic. Nothing in history is inevitable when people resist. Predictions of inevitability are political weapons, not truths.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="Diversity is our strength."}}
--**Claim:** Diversity inherently strengthens societies.
++**Claim:** Diversity inherently strengthens societies.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* Diversity is only forced on White nations, never others.
++* Homogeneity produces the highest trust and cooperation levels.
++* Every example of diversity leads to fragmentation and conflict.
--* Diversity is only forced on White nations, never others.
--* Homogeneity produces the highest trust and cooperation levels.
--* Every example of diversity leads to fragmentation and conflict.
--
  **Explanation:**
  The slogan “diversity is our strength” is propaganda. No evidence supports it; in fact, the opposite is true. High-trust societies are homogeneous, while diverse societies fracture. Diversity weakens unity, it does not strengthen it.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="Race is a social construct."}}
--**Claim:** Race does not exist biologically, only socially.
++**Claim:** Race does not exist biologically, only socially.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* Genetics show clear, measurable differences between groups.
++* If race did not exist, accusations against Whites for slavery or colonialism would be meaningless.
++* Anti-Whites contradict themselves by saying race is fake but Whites are uniquely guilty.
--* Genetics show clear, measurable differences between groups.
--* If race did not exist, accusations against Whites for slavery or colonialism would be meaningless.
--* Anti-Whites contradict themselves by saying race is fake but Whites are uniquely guilty.
--
  **Explanation:**
  Race denial is a contradiction. Biological differences are real and documented. The claim “race doesn’t exist” is selectively used to erase Whites, while still blaming them collectively for history. That hypocrisy exposes its true purpose.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="We all came from Africa."}}
--**Claim:** Common African origins make racial distinctions meaningless.
++**Claim:** Common African origins make racial distinctions meaningless.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* Shared distant origins do not erase present distinctions.
++* This logic could excuse any genocide by saying “we’re all from the same place.”
++* Differences that matter now remain, regardless of ancient history.
--* Shared distant origins do not erase present distinctions.
--* This logic could excuse any genocide by saying “we’re all from the same place.”
--* Differences that matter now remain, regardless of ancient history.
--
  **Explanation:**
  Appealing to origins in Africa is another rhetorical trick. If all groups come from Africa, why is this only used against Whites? Distinctions exist today and define real peoples. Past migrations don’t erase present identities.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="Immigration is good for the economy."}}
--**Claim:** Immigration benefits the economy, so it must be positive.
++**Claim:** Immigration benefits the economy, so it must be positive.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* Economic benefit does not justify genocide.
++* If immigration were so beneficial, non-White countries would be wealthy.
++* Long-term costs (crime, welfare, division) outweigh temporary gains.
--* Economic benefit does not justify genocide.
--* If immigration were so beneficial, non-White countries would be wealthy.
--* Long-term costs (crime, welfare, division) outweigh temporary gains.
--
  **Explanation:**
  Reducing survival to economics is immoral. A people’s existence cannot be measured in GDP points. Even if immigration boosted some metrics, it would not justify policies that destroy a people.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="You're just a Nazi fascist racist bigot supremacist."}}
--**Claim:** Anyone defending Whites is simply hateful and extremist.
++**Claim:** Anyone defending Whites is simply hateful and extremist.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* These are slurs used to silence dissent.
++* None of these labels address the actual argument.
++* Name-calling replaces debate when anti-Whites have no evidence.
--* These are slurs used to silence dissent.
--* None of these labels address the actual argument.
--* Name-calling replaces debate when anti-Whites have no evidence.
--
  **Explanation:**
  Slurs like “racist” and “Nazi” are used to shut down discussion, not to refute facts. They are emotional weapons of censorship. Their overuse shows weakness, not strength, in the anti-White position.
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="You invaded America and Australia, now you complain about invasion?"}}
--**Claim:** Whites cannot oppose immigration because they colonized in the past.
++**Claim:** Whites cannot oppose immigration because they colonized in the past.
  **Rebuttal:**
++* Every race has conquered land — not just Whites.
++* Past conquest does not justify genocide today.
++* By this logic, every people should be destroyed, which is absurd.
--* Every race has conquered land — not just Whites.
--* Past conquest does not justify genocide today.
--* By this logic, every people should be destroyed, which is absurd.
--
  **Explanation:**
  “Whites invaded” is not a valid justification for erasing Whites now. All races have expanded and conquered. Only Whites are uniquely told their past delegitimizes their present. This exposes the argument as anti-White propaganda, not principle.
  {{/expandable}}
--{{expandable summary="Would Christ turn away sufferers?"}}
--**Claim:**It's not Chrtistianlike to prioritize race
--**Rebuttal:**
--
--* Aren't Jews Gods chosen people? Didn't he give them Israel?
--* If these people are suffering and they are hardworking decent people, wouldn't it cause more suffering to take them away from the countries that need help the most?
--
--**Explanation:**
--God himself separated the races at the Tower of Babel and clearly designed us with different features. So not only does it do more harm than good by allowing ourselves to be demographically swamped and die out, it accomplishes nothing. Non white nations will be worse off with us gone, not better off.
--{{/expandable}}
--
--{{expandable summary="White privilege is unfair."}}
--**Claim:** Whites deserve whats happening because of their privilege.
--**Rebuttal:**
--
--* This isn't even true, whites are the most attacked group in America and aren't allowed any advocacies.
--* Even if it were true, it wouldn't justify us dying out
--* If this was true, it would only apply to White countries. Do you think asians dont have Asian privilege in Asian countries?
--
--**Explanation:**
--If whites have privilege it doesn’t justify white genocide.
--{{/expandable}}
--
--{{expandable summary="We can't alienate potential non-white voters."}}
--**Claim**: We must avoid alienating potential non-white voters.
--**Rebuttal:**
--*Appeasing non-white voters cannot come at the expense of White survival.
--*Political strategies do not justify policies that enable or excuse White demographic replacement.
--
--A policy that alienates Whites in their own countries is inherently illegitimate, regardless of electoral calculus.
--Explanation: Framing White survival as secondary to vote-getting assumes that demographics are expendable for politics. Survival is not negotiable; “votes” cannot justify population displacement or replacement.
--{{/expandable}}
--
--{{expandable summary="“For votes” doesn’t justify genocidal policies."}}
--Claim: Vote-getting justifies demographic policies.
--Rebuttal:
--
--A vote motive does not excuse replacement or dispossession.
--
--No political system is legitimate if it requires destroying its founding people.
--
--Claiming “votes” is a distraction from the reality of demographic attack.
--Explanation: Political expediency is not a moral shield. Policies leading to White decline remain genocidal regardless of intent.
--{{/expandable}}
--
--{{expandable summary="Whites stole America."}}
--Claim: Whites stole America.
--Rebuttal:
--
--All peoples have conquered land; conquest is universal in history.
--
--Native tribes themselves displaced, fought, and exterminated one another long before Europeans arrived.
--
--Calling White conquest “theft” implies illegitimacy, but never applies that label to non-Whites doing the same.
--Explanation: If conquest voids legitimacy, then no nation or people can claim land. Singling out Whites is hypocrisy.
--{{/expandable}}
--
--{{expandable summary="Contradictory anti-White logic on land and borders."}}
--Claim: Whites stole land, yet borders don’t exist.
--Rebuttal:
--
--If land ownership is illegitimate, then no one can accuse Whites of stealing.
--
--If land can be stolen, then borders and ownership clearly exist, making conquest legitimate.
--
--Anti-White rhetoric contradicts itself depending on which argument is convenient.
--Explanation: This reveals the agenda: delegitimizing White presence regardless of logic. It is not a principled stance, but a targeted attack.
--{{/expandable}}
--
--{{expandable summary="Conquest is universal, Whites have equal right."}}
--Claim: Whites conquered America, making it illegitimate.
--Rebuttal:
--
--Conquest is how nearly all nations formed, across all races.
--
--Whites are singled out while non-White conquests (Turks in Constantinople, Bantus in southern Africa) are ignored.
--
--If conquest is universal, Whites’ claim is as legitimate as anyone else’s.
--Explanation: History cannot be selectively weaponized only against Whites.
--{{/expandable}}
--
--{{expandable summary="Saying Whites stole America admits it is White."}}
--Claim: Whites stole America.
--Rebuttal:
--
--If Whites stole it, then it is by definition a White country now.
--
--Diversity did not “steal” America; conquest and settlement did.
--
--The rhetoric inadvertently admits the truth of ownership and establishment.
--Explanation: To claim theft is to admit transfer of possession. By their own words, America is a White nation.
--{{/expandable}}
--
--{{expandable summary="If America was stolen, leave it."}}
--Claim: America was stolen from Indians.
--Rebuttal:
--
--If occupation is illegitimate, the moral solution is to vacate stolen land.
--
--Those who denounce Whites while living here prove they do not believe their own claim.
--
--Consistency would demand that anti-White activists leave America entirely.
--Explanation: Hypocrisy shows their aim is not justice but targeting Whites.
--{{/expandable}}
--
--{{expandable summary="Welfare argument is irrelevant."}}
--Claim: Most people on welfare are White.
--Rebuttal:
--
--Welfare statistics do not justify demographic replacement.
--
--Whites paying into the system far exceed non-Whites, meaning redistribution favors others.
--
--Poverty does not make a people disposable.
--Explanation: Welfare arguments are red herrings; they distract from the core issue of survival.
--{{/expandable}}
--
--{{expandable summary="Whites have no culture."}}
--Claim: Whites have no culture.
--Rebuttal:
--
--Western civilization is one of the richest cultural traditions in history.
--
--Claiming a people “doesn’t exist” is a known genocidal tactic.
--
--Denying identity is a step toward justifying elimination.
--Explanation: Delegitimizing culture is psychological warfare. It is proof of genocidal intent.
--{{/expandable}}
--
--{{expandable summary="Globalists vs White genocide."}}
--Claim: Globalists are the real enemy, focus on them.
--Rebuttal:
--
--Globalists are dangerous, but they target Whites specifically for elimination.
--
--White nations must first secure survival before joining broader struggles.
--
--Concern trolling about “globalists” is used to divert attention from White genocide.
--Explanation: Global battles cannot be fought if Whites are erased. Survival comes before coalition.
--{{/expandable}}
--
--{{expandable summary="Europe is the White homeland."}}
--Claim: Whites must go back to Europe.
--Rebuttal:
--
--By that logic, all non-Whites should leave Europe.
--
--Should Turks leave Constantinople? Should Bantus vacate southern Africa? Should tribes vacate lands they conquered?
--
--Conquest and migration are universal; only Whites are told to leave.
--Explanation: The “go back” demand is not about fairness, but about dispossessing Whites uniquely.
--{{/expandable}}
--
--{{expandable summary="Conquest is consistent across races."}}
--Claim: Whites stole land, unlike others.
--Rebuttal:
--
--Turks stole Constantinople from Whites.
--
--Bantus stole southern Africa from Capoids.
--
--Ojibwe stole from Lakota, who stole from others.
--Explanation: Conquest is universal. Singling out Whites exposes bias, not principle.
--{{/expandable}}