eck, if you can formulate a coherent argument from them I'd like to hear it, because all I hear is a bunch of slogans and half-formed ideas with a general undercurrent of 'whitey bad'. You should know by now that they're the footsoldiers of the establishment; they've never had an original idea in their lives.
Their arguments that whitey are bad are the same arguments stormfags have that jews are bad.
No difference.
As for segregation working? Well, that's what national borders are for, or used to be for in a saner age.
Okay, well in that case I definitely don't agree with them that 'whitey is bad'.
I don't think national borders are a false comparison at all. What purpose do they serve other than to separate different groups of people who want to live differently? That's segregation, by its definition, if not by its politicised American historical definition.
I don't think national borders are a false comparison at all.
It is.
What purpose do they serve other than to separate different groups of people who want to live differently? That's segregation, by its definition, if not by its politicised American historical definition.
Because your comparison is segregation based on nationality, while segregation here is based on race by people who share a nationality.
So, if you don't agree with "whitey is bad" message, then you must agree that "jews are bad" message is also wrong.
Race and nationality, up until very recently in human terms, were inextricably linked. There are of course many factors that can lead to people splitting and forming their own communities, but race is clearly a primary one. Historically, you can't make people of different ancestries live together peacefully for any length of time.
There appears to be a genetic threshold where two peoples are too different from each other and will self-segregate. This, eventually, will lead to them forming their own communities, and then nations.
This is human nature; it doesn't matter how much you try to 'educate' it out of people, at the end of the day, their genes will do the talking.
As for your second point, I don't think any group of people are 'bad'. Reality is much more complicated than that.
It sounds like you are advocating for CRT, and SJW nonsense. Step back a little, and imagine you are talking to an SJW with your argument. What does it sound like?
Their arguments that whitey are bad are the same arguments stormfags have that jews are bad.
No difference.
Cool, nice way to make a false comparison.
Okay, well in that case I definitely don't agree with them that 'whitey is bad'.
I don't think national borders are a false comparison at all. What purpose do they serve other than to separate different groups of people who want to live differently? That's segregation, by its definition, if not by its politicised American historical definition.
It is.
Because your comparison is segregation based on nationality, while segregation here is based on race by people who share a nationality.
So, if you don't agree with "whitey is bad" message, then you must agree that "jews are bad" message is also wrong.
Race and nationality, up until very recently in human terms, were inextricably linked. There are of course many factors that can lead to people splitting and forming their own communities, but race is clearly a primary one. Historically, you can't make people of different ancestries live together peacefully for any length of time.
There appears to be a genetic threshold where two peoples are too different from each other and will self-segregate. This, eventually, will lead to them forming their own communities, and then nations.
This is human nature; it doesn't matter how much you try to 'educate' it out of people, at the end of the day, their genes will do the talking.
As for your second point, I don't think any group of people are 'bad'. Reality is much more complicated than that.
It sounds like you are advocating for CRT, and SJW nonsense. Step back a little, and imagine you are talking to an SJW with your argument. What does it sound like?