The Guardian: The last days of a white world (please read this concerning article)

I didn't know white people were so fragile, black people have often been in a minority but they seem to be able to get their lives together but a few blacks in a white neighbourhood and it all goes to pot.

Europe won't exist without Europeans, not in any real sense. The land will be there, maybe the economic institutions will be too. The people living there wont be European.

Look at the the USA for instance, the USA has always had immigration, yet up until recently it was 90% white, 10% black, because the immigration policies were set up in a way where it would not change the ethnic demographics.

Demographics do not simply "change all the time", it is not some unavoidable natural thing, it is the result of deliberate policies that have been imposed on populations that never consented to them and have been culturally propagandised to not question or resist.

Look at the the USA for instance, the USA has always had immigration, yet up until recently it was 90% white, 10% black, because the immigration policies were set up in a way where it would not change the ethnic demographics. This was changed deliberately and now the USA is 60% white if that, the same thing that stopped mexicans, indians and asians before is what has been making them come in ever increasing numbers since the 70's -policy, not accident. The architects of the change in immigration policy (which happened in 1965) said it would not change the demographics of the USA, we can now see that as the bare faced lie it was.

But if you have any problem with that profound demographic and cultural shift turning your country into an unrecognisable identityless wasteland with no community or shared purpose? Oh your obviously a white supremacist who hates all non-whites! Not to mention the same thing has miraculously been forced on Western european countries, even countries like Sweden which had replacement level birth rates has gone from paradise to multicultural hell in 30 years, but it's all unavoidable and natural and good I guess. Better let in more "refugees" and give them free apartments and benefits.

And it's not a matter of "inferior" or "superior" or whatever other strawmen the establishment have been churning out for 50 years. It's about distinct ethnic groups being wiped out in the name of corporate interests and their own "tolerance". Guarantee if it were your ethnic group that faced the same thing you and no one else would cheer it on. The propaganda is deep.

Europe won't exist without Europeans, not in any real sense. The land will be there, maybe the economic institutions will be too. The people living there wont be European. If you flooded China with white, brown and black people until there were no chinese people left, China wouldn't exist either.
People in cities are more miserable and find it harder to get into long term relationships then people in suburban or rural areas. The white people in London who actually want families all moved to Essex and Kent to be around their own kind. Race isn't the only factor here, but when you have people who broadly share the same heritage, there is more sense of community and a higher level of trust. Studies have proven this, look up Robert D Putnam. Multiculturalism is and has always been about race. It is about the racial replacement of whites, nothing more. Europe was already "multicultural" before the term and concept existed. The concept has always existed as a way for whites to accept non-white immigration - it literally serves no other purpose then that and if your honest with yourself you could probably admit it.

Something people like you with this idea fail to realize is by opening up mass migration to cheapen workforce and grow the economy it has a knock on effect longterm; mostly being those thousands/hundreds of thousands/millions of migrants you took in will eventually grow old too.

The UK will feel the full force of this in say 40-50 years when our healthcare, housing and welfare system buckle under the pressure of so many elderly.

Japan will not suffer these issues nearly as much.

The argument of ageing population is such overblown myth by the left-wing media outlets like BBC.

And even if it is true there are far more better solutions than impoeting people from every hellhole around world.

The media have a faulth on this as well.

Japan is not going to open its borders, not only because of the Nationalist Party's huge majority, but also because there isn't a mandate to do so.

Japan has heavily invested in robotics to replace unskilled sectors of the economy. Although Japan will face challenges in the future, they most certainly don't have to open their doors.

This is undoubtedly rational, sadly though the PC, moral outrage brigade will always be there calling any criticism of a culture(like militant Islamism)or multiculturalism, racist, as they deliberately conflate the issues of culture and race.

No less than than the white and black people currently living in the Americas are American.

i) For a start, the territory that makes up the USA was, for 97-98% of its human history, 0% white and 0% black.

ii) The first whites to reach and settle in what is now the USA arrived there only about 500 years ago. Also, they were Hispanic whites, namely Spaniards.

iii) The USA, of course, did not exist until 1776, and didn't reach something resembling its current borders until the late 19th century.

iv) For the first 60 years or so of its existence, the population distribution of the US was closer to 80% white, 20% black than 90-10. From the 1830s on, the black proportion of the population gradually declined for several decades, reaching 10% during the 1910s. The non-Hispanic white population of the USA never quite reached 90%, peaking at 88.5% in 1920 (even if you include Hispanic whites, it only reached 90% on a couple of censuses if you round up). Though even these are somewhat incomplete and gerrymandered results because they don't include the Philippines, which was part of the USA as a territory from 1898 to 1946, and Filipinos made up ~10% of the population of all US sovereign territory during that time.

Migration waves aren't new, except now it isn't white Huguenots but anyone from all four corners of the earth.

Japan has low birth rates yet doesn't bear an existentialist threat. It's not a matter of birth rates but a matter of weak borders and non-whites being politically incentivised by our governments to come to white countries. It is part of deliberate political and cultural will to make white people extinct, along with promoting "diversity" and shaming anyone who disagrees. If you had said in 1996 that white people would ever be a minority in the UK, people would look at you like you were crazy, no one knew immigration was ever going to be on the scale it has been, no one has ever consented to it, it has been forced on us and politicians have consistently lied about their intentions.

It's so sad. We're becoming a minority in many areas of our own countries, which is really sad.

To those who say we need to have more children, the world population is already far too large. I think instead the emphasis should be on bringing down birth rates in high-birth rate places.

The ideal world population in my opinion would be between 3 and 4 billion.

why cant these brownies just **** off back home

Demographics do not simply "change all the time", it is not some unavoidable natural thing, it is the result of deliberate policies that have been imposed on populations that never consented to them and have been culturally propagandised to not question or resist.

Look at the the USA for instance, the USA has always had immigration, yet up until recently it was 90% white, 10% black, because the immigration policies were set up in a way where it would not change the ethnic demographics. This was changed deliberately and now the USA is 60% white if that, the same thing that stopped mexicans, indians and asians before is what has been making them come in ever increasing numbers since the 70's -policy, not accident. The architects of the change in immigration policy (which happened in 1965) said it would not change the demographics of the USA, we can now see that as the bare faced lie it was.

But if you have any problem with that profound demographic and cultural shift turning your country into an unrecognisable identityless wasteland with no community or shared purpose? Oh your obviously a white supremacist who hates all non-whites! Not to mention the same thing has miraculously been forced on Western european countries, even countries like Sweden which had replacement level birth rates has gone from paradise to multicultural hell in 30 years, but it's all unavoidable and natural and good I guess. Better let in more "refugees" and give them free apartments and benefits.

And it's not a matter of "inferior" or "superior" or whatever other strawmen the establishment have been churning out for 50 years. It's about distinct ethnic groups being wiped out in the name of corporate interests and their own "tolerance". Guarantee if it were your ethnic group that faced the same thing you and no one else would cheer it on. The propaganda is deep.

Europe won't exist without Europeans, not in any real sense. The land will be there, maybe the economic institutions will be too. The people living there wont be European. If you flooded China with white, brown and black people until there were no chinese people left, China wouldn't exist either.

People in cities are more miserable and find it harder to get into long term relationships then people in suburban or rural areas. The white people in London who actually want families all moved to Essex and Kent to be around their own kind. Race isn't the only factor here, but when you have people who broadly share the same heritage, there is more sense of community and a higher level of trust. Studies have proven this, look up Robert D Putnam.

Multiculturalism is and has always been about race. It is about the racial replacement of whites, nothing more. Europe was already "multicultural" before the term and concept existed. The concept has always existed as a way for whites to accept non-white immigration - it literally serves no other purpose then that and if your honest with yourself you could probably admit it.

Yup. Spain and then Mexico between them ruled California for 300 years before it joined the USA in 1850, and the large white settlement that accompanied the California Gold Rush.

Upside: No more bratty leftists and obnoxious women

Downside: No more civilisation, more crime, basically Brazil

You do realize Brazil isn't overwhelming white because, like the rest of the Americas, there actually were people before white people arrived? And that most of its "brown people" have been a result of mating between white people and native Americans?

Or perhaps you will know that the overwhelming majority of immigration into Brazil has been from Europe, mostly from Portugal and Italy?

Or at the very least you can acknowledge the fact that 100% of the cabinet right now are white males in Brazil.

Do you think that it was also deliberate policy that the population was once as much as 20% and is now in the low teens? That's a more significant proportional change. If we look back since the 1930s the white population in the USA has doubled. It's not being stifled at all.

The fact that you think that sharing a country with people of other races is a 'hell' and that you tie your culture and identity inextricably to your race is why you're open to being accused of supremacy. You don't believe that your culture can be shared with people of a different skin colour. But culture and race are separate.

There is no 'corporate interest' in removing ethnic groups.

European culture is ideas not skin tones. Same goes for China. And in a century's time China may well be a hot spot for immigration as it becomes a more modern economic superpower. Building trust between people of different heritage is part of becoming a better, more united species that's evolved passed judging others on skin colour. You can create a country with a single dominant culture for the sake of national unity or whatever but multiple races (via cultural assimilation) or you can create a country with multiple cultural traditions (and potentially just as many different races) for the perceived benefits of multiculturalism.