I can't believe I need to explain this to someone. You're being disingenuous as hell. Distance is a factor. The greater the distance, the less commonality among people. In math it's called the inverse square law. The farther you go away from something, the less effect that thing has. This is a universal law which is applicable to everything. When applied to the real world, you get exactly this. This is how speciation and sub-speciation occurs in lifeforms. Distance.

This concept is applicable to and affects homogeneous societies and nations. Almost universally, you'll have more commonality among people closer to you than you will with people far away. This has only been intentionally changed recently due to the implementation of unnatural laws and processes (by globalists in power), including open borders, mass immigration of peoples different to the host population, and enforced propaganda of multiculturalism and diversity on the population, so they accept it. Again, this is only being pushed on white majority countries.

So, how does distance affect homogeneous nations? Single communities and cities will have people be the most common, especially in nations with freedom of movement (like the U.S.), where people can vote with their feet, and move to areas where they have more commonality with the people. The people who live closest together will generally be the most common. Further outward, states (as in the United States concept of it), provinces, or sectors will have decreasing commonality among the people as compared to groups of people in communities and cities, but more commonality than the totality of people living in the entire nation. Furthest outward, the totality of people in the nation itself will have the least commonality. Homogeneity occurs in gradation outward relative to distance. However, the people of the nation will still have a strong enough commonality as to allow the nation itself to exist as it is. Historically, if the differentiation among a nation's population gets too great, it results in subjugation and/or enforced assimilation of a specific group by the other(s), and can also result in slavery, sectarian violence, genocide, civil war, secession, balkanization, or some other form of violence or isolation of the differing peoples.

This is how you can get differentation among a nation's population. The nation will be homogeneous to some degree, but the communities, cities, and provinces of a nation will be even more homogeneous. This doesn't mean homogeneity isn't a controlling factor, only that it decreases over distance. If heterogeneity gets too great, it fractures the nation. All nations must be homogeneous to a certain extent to remain stable. The more homogeneous a nation is, the better.

Everything else you said is either a logical fallacy or some other form of misinformation, foolishness, or lie.

I can't believe I need to explain this to someone. You're being disingenuous as hell. Distance is a factor. The greater the distance, the less commonality among people. In math it's called the inverse square law. The farther you go away from something, the less effect that thing has. This is a universal law which is applicable to everything. When applied to the real world, you get exactly this. This is how speciation and sub-speciation occurs in lifeforms. Distance.

This concept is applicable to and affects homogeneous societies and nations. Almost universally, you'll have more commonality among people closer to you than you will with people far away. This has only been intentionally changed recently due to the implementation of unnatural laws and processes (by globalists in power), including open borders, mass immigration of peoples different to the host population, and enforced propaganda of multiculturalism and diversity on the population, so they accept it. Again, this is only being pushed on white majority countries.

So, how does distance affect homogeneous nations? Single communities and cities will have people be the most common, especially in nations with freedom of movement (like the U.S.), where people can vote with their feet, and move to areas where they have more commonality with the people. The people who live closest together will generally be the most common. Further outward, states (as in the United States concept of it), provinces, or sectors will have decreasing commonality among the people as compared to groups of people in communities and cities, but more commonality than the totality of people living in the entire nation. Furthest outward, the totality of people in the nation itself will have the least commonality. However, the people of the nation will still have a strong enough commonality as to allow the nation itself to exist as it is. Historically, if the differentiation among a nation's population gets too great, it results in subjugation and/or enforced assimilation of a specific group by the other(s), and can also result in slavery, sectarian violence, genocide, civil war, secession, balkanization, or some other form of violence or isolation of the differing peoples.

This is how you can get differentation among a nation's population. The nation will be homogeneous to some degree, but the communities, cities, and provinces of a nation will be even more homogeneous. This doesn't mean homogeneity isn't a controlling factor, only that it decreases over distance. If heterogeneity gets too great, it fractures the nation. All nations must be homogeneous to a certain extent to remain stable. The more homogeneous a nation is, the better.

Everything else you said is either a logical fallacy or some other form of misinformation, foolishness, or lie.