I hate to seem like an unreserved Trump supporter. As a White rights advocate and as a Naturalistic thinker, there are many troubling things about him, and I certainly don’t agree with him on everything. But I will be voting for him, and the thing that I love best about him, is his backbone: his courage as a White man to go out and say things that no White politician has been willing to say, and to take the hatred, and push back against the melanosupremacist bullies. That I like, if for nothing else, because it is changing the climate of the country forever, and has done so already whatever happens to Trump now. And in the same vein, Trump has brought out in many melanosupremacists fresh and very widely publicized attacks on Whiteness that make great starting points for posts here. One of those things is the latest trend among melanosupremacists to play on his campaign slogan, turning it into “make America White again.” To my knowledge, Trump himself has never acknowledged any such intention (and his stated intention to allow or even increase legal immigration from places like Mexico, certainly doesn’t reassure). But it’s the fact that they think this is an insult that is the real problem here. I’d like to consider for a moment, just what on earth is wrong with wanting to make America White again?
What is wrong with loving White people?
If a White person says they would like to see their country White again, what they are really saying is “I like White people.” They are saying they prefer White people, and prefer to be with White people. There is, and should be, nothing wrong with this. They are White. Of course they should love and favor White people. This is Natural, right and just.
What it all boils down to, is that melanosupremacists don’t like White people. Not only that, but they don’t want White people to like being White either. They want Whites to hate themselves. Teaching someone self-loathing must surely fall under some progressive cannon of abuse somewhere, but they think it is perfectly fine to abuse someone as long as they are White.
When you oppose someone’s desire to see their country Whiter than it is now, what you are really opposing is their positive self-concept, and their healthy racial identity, and their love for White people—just because they and those they like are White. That has to be textbook ‘racism’. And besides, what’s really so wrong about that?
What is wrong with wanting racial homogeneity?
Another thing the person who states this desire is indicating, is that they don’t want to live in a multi-racial society. It is blasphemy against equalitarian orthodoxy to even hint that one would prefer to be surrounded by only one race. Especially if that is one’s own race, and especially if one is White. But it’s time to stop and think—what is so wrong with wanting a racially homogenous social world?
Why is racial integration the ‘right’ preference, and racial segregation/separation the ‘wrong’ preference? People, for various reasons, differ on their preferences for their social environment. In an equalitarian society that stresses “acceptance”, “tolerance” for differences, “inclusion”, and moral relativism, you would think it should be deemed fine to have either preference. Alas, all that “acceptance,” “tolerance”, and “inclusion” only goes one way: because melanosupremacists want a homogenous world too—ideologically homogenous that is—and one that excludes Whites. Yet they sanctimoniously condemn any White person who would express a preference for a society that considers their needs.
Meanwhile, research has shown that homogenous societies are happier and more efficient. And frankly, people just innately want to be around their own kind—research has shown that too. It is normal, and healthy. So I ask you again, what is so ‘wrong’ about wanting a racially homogenous life?
What is wrong with doing what they do (from their perspective)?
Finally, when a White person expresses a desire to see their country White again, they are not doing anything that melanosupremacists haven’t been doing long before them. For many years now, we have all been hearing endlessly—and always with at least some racial hostility towards White people—the “fact” that America (and even more horrifyingly, Europe) are fast becoming “brown.” Melanosupremacists have gloated with devilish glee for years as they watched their White shaming and melanosupremacist policies turning White majority countries, including the United States, into increasingly non-White countries, headed for a non-White majority in what has appeared to be a reasonably near future.
By celebrating a racial take-over, they are explicitly stating a desire for a certain racial makeup in society—one that sees the White share drastically reduced, or even eliminated. With all that in their corner, there is no room for them to complain about anyone having a preference for a country’s racial makeup. In refusing White people the right to a preference for a White country, they are refusing to give to White people—and only White people—the ability to favor a country where they predominate. It is rank hypocrisy, and there is something very wrong with hypocrisy.
From an equalitarian perspective, there shouldn’t be anything wrong with a White desire for a White country. After all, they have been openly desiring—and what’s more, plotting to achieve—a non-White country for quite some time. White people pushing back against their own dispossession should only be expected.
Is Europe Unique?
For the record, I’ll add that as a racialist, I see the cases of Europe and North America/Australia quite distinctly from each other. Europe is the homeland of the White race, and as such, no other race has any right to be there, engaging in the social fabric of European society. People will doubtless point out that North America (i.e. US and Canada) is not White people’s natural habitat—and that is true, and as a racial separatist, I would be a hypocrite not to acknowledge it. The same largely goes for other White majority countries to which Whites are not native (mostly that would be Australia and New Zealand).
Does this mean that Whites in North America and Australia do not have a right to ask that they remain the predominate race in those places? The answer is, that the only race who has more of a right to be there than Whites is the native race of those places. They are also the only race that the White majority is under a moral obligation to allow to live in the land. But when it comes to non-Whites who belong to races which are no more native to these lands than Whites are, the fact that White people are not native becomes irrelevant. Thus, as long as melanosupremacists insist that all non-White races, and not only the native race, be favored legally and predominate in the country, the White people in these countries have a right to demand a predominately (i.e. just them and the native race) White population.