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 31.2 to 31.1 From 34.2 to 34.1

From version

edited by Ryan C
on 2025/08/18 01:10

Change comment: There is no comment for this version

To version

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

Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Raw
Rendered

Summary

Page properties (2 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)

Details

Page properties

Title

@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
--Common Arguments
++Common Myths

Content

@@ -3,14 +3,13 @@
  {{/success}}
  {{expandable summary="We will all become one uniform Mixed Race"}}
--**Claim: **Over time, humanity will homogenize into one race of mixed-race individuals due to globalization and intermixing.
++Claim: Over time, humanity will homogenize into one race of mixed-race individuals due to globalization and intermixing.
--**Rebuttal:**
++Rebuttal:
--* Blending into one race assumes uniform mixing across all populations, which is unlikely due to societal, cultural, and geographical barriers.
--* Historical evidence shows that distinct ethnic groups have maintained separate identities for millennia despite some intermixing.
--* High birth rates among certain populations mean some ethnic groups will likely persist as dominant demographics in specific regions.
--
++Blending into one race assumes uniform mixing across all populations, which is unlikely due to societal, cultural, and geographical barriers.
++Historical evidence shows that distinct ethnic groups have maintained separate identities for millennia despite some intermixing.
++High birth rates among certain populations mean some ethnic groups will likely persist as dominant demographics in specific regions.
  Explanation: The idea that humanity will blend into one homogenous race oversimplifies the reality of demographic trends. Different populations have maintained their distinct identities for centuries, even under conditions of migration and intermixing. For example, despite centuries of migration into Europe, distinct ethnicities like the Basques or Sami people still exist. Additionally, demographic trends show that fertility rates vary significantly across groups, meaning some populations grow faster than others. For instance, many African and Middle Eastern countries have much higher birth rates than Europe or East Asia, making a global "blending" implausible. Societies naturally form cultural and ethnic distinctions, even when migration occurs
  [[See also: White Genocide for statistics on this>>doc:Main Categories.Race.White Genocide.WebHome]]
@@ -70,9 +70,22 @@
  * 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. We don’t demand that the whole world be white. 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.
++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.
++
++**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.
++
++**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.
@@ -438,7 +438,7 @@
  {{/expandable}}
  {{expandable summary="Would Christ turn away sufferers?"}}
--**Claim: **It's not Chrtistianlike to prioritize race
++**Claim:**It's not Chrtistianlike to prioritize race
  **Rebuttal:**
  * Aren't Jews Gods chosen people? Didn't he give them Israel?
@@ -463,119 +463,141 @@
  {{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.
--* 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.
++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}}
--**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 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:**
++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.
++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:**
++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.
++If land ownership is illegitimate, then no one can accuse Whites of stealing.
--**Explanation:**
--This reveals the agenda: delegitimizing White presence regardless of logic. It is not a principled stance, but a targeted attack.
++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:**
++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.
++Conquest is how nearly all nations formed, across all races.
--**Explanation: **
--History cannot be selectively weaponized only against Whites.
++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:**
++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.
++If Whites stole it, then it is by definition a White country now.
--**Explanation:**
++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:**
++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.
++If occupation is illegitimate, the moral solution is to vacate stolen land.
--**Explanation:**
++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:**
++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.
++Welfare statistics do not justify demographic replacement.
--**Explanation:**
--Welfare arguments are red herrings; they distract from the core issue of survival.
++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:**
++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.
++Western civilization is one of the richest cultural traditions in history.
--**Explanation:**
++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:**
++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
++Globalists are dangerous, but they target Whites specifically for elimination.
--**Explanation:**
++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:**
++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. Do you think all non-whites should leave Europe?
++By that logic, all non-Whites should leave Europe.
--**Explanation:**
--Do you think all non-Siberians should leave America?
--All races have conquered land. Whites have as much right to land they conquered as every other race. Should Turks give Constantinople back to the white people they stole it from? Should Congoids give back the land they stole from Capoids in southern Africa? Should Ojibwe give back land they stole from Lakota?
++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}}