Talk:White genocide

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
This page is automatically archived by Archiver
Archives for this talk page: <1>

Debunking of decrease in overall whites misleading[edit]

"Their equivocation of decrease in the percentage of white people with decrease in the actual number. If we look at US census results, we see that whites comprised 75.1% of the total US population in 2000, and 72.4% in 2010 - giving the impression that whites have declined in number. But if we look at the actual population numbers we see that, between the ten years, the total number of whites actually rose from 211,460,626 to 223,553,265.[2] "

This is true, but only if Hispanics are considered white. Most proponents of white extinction don't think of Hispanics as white, as they use white as a synonym for European. Using the same census data, the non-hispanic white population increase between 2000 and 2010 rose from 194,552,774 to 196,817,552, an increase of 2,264,778 or 1.2 percent, which is dramatically lower than most other ethnic groups. Population estimates in 2012 show that total non-hispanic white deaths outnumber births.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/white-deaths-outnumber-births-for-first-time/2013/06/13/3bb1017c-d388-11e2-a73e-826d299ff459_story.html — Unsigned, by: 24.22.74.33 / talk 03:52, 21 February 2015‎

Fun fact: Spanish people are European. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 05:47, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Oh look more Leftist dishonesty. Hispanics are not exclusively "Spanish" as you know, liar, they are mainly Amerindian, especially those invading the USA. 125.61.100.2 (talk) 05:50, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Great. Why does a decrease in the number of non-"Hispanic" "whites" matter? Cømяade FυzzчCαтPøтαтø (talk/stalk) 06:03, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Also interesting: "Whites" as a group will still increase, because "white" immigration outnumbers deaths. Cømяade FυzzчCαтPøтαтø (talk/stalk) 06:06, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Another point consistently erased by racists is that power and cultural elites in Europe and North America are still overwhelmingly white (even if you apply some super-restrictive definition à la "of Northern/Northwestern/Central European descent, without significant Jewish ancestry"), so even if whites by whatever definition become a numerical minority in any country, that does not mean that they will lose their power and cultural dominance even if all citizens of non-white ancestry suddenly magically de-assimilated, formed an alliance for the purposes of rebellion and tried to overthrow the white elites. In African colonies, notably South Africa, whites have always been perfectly able to hold onto power despite forming a numerical minority – often a tiny one – and facing numerous violent rebellions. So all this statistical wankery is quite irrelevant in the first place. The system at place in white-dominated countries ensuring the continuity of white privilege and white supremacist ideology is very effective at self-perpetuation even despite pissing of people of colour.
Of course, we leftists have the goal to change this system and abolish white privilege, but given that the result would also give people of colour far less reason for rebellion in the first place, it would not exactly increase the risk of doom to the white demographic, despite the incessant panicking of racists that "Cultural Marxism" is destroying "white culture". Ironically, for all their sermons on precious white culture and values like science and democracy and human rights, in practice, most of them show remarkably little evidence of actually caring for white culture (except when it fits and propagates their preconceived ideas), science (except when it, or some bastardisation thereof, agrees with their prejudices), democracy and human rights (except for white people, obviously). The average Neo-Nazi is not exactly a paragon of education, either. --91.7.30.163 (talk) 20:43, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

This whole "article" is a straw man at its finest[edit]

On top of other faulty representations as brought up by other users, there is a false dilemma presented as a "solution" to white genocide in paragraph: "there is no way of preventing the situation without banning international travel, banning international students and eliminating lust" International students and travel? Brwahahaha. The biggest factor is uncontrolled mass immigration enforced without any discussion by establishment politics AND transnational "institutions" such as UN, UNHCR & "Amnesty international".

/r/altright is triggered[edit]

https://www.reddit.com/r/altright/comments/52o4ov/this_is_what_the_farleft_thinks_about_european/

Yes, white countries are the only place where minorities are given equal rights for the most part. In Africa/the middle east, minorities are butchered constantly, and they have the nerve to complain about us not wanting to become non-white majority countries.

The moment that final brown baby pops out and you become a white-minority country, bam! There go your human rights. Just ask the Japanese -- they're fascists, right? oʇɐʇoԀʇɐϽʎzznℲ (talk/stalk) 12:25, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

White World Awake![edit]

White World Awake! by Jurgen Graf is the only source I know of that attempts to defend the white genocide argument in detail. Yes the author, rightly or wrongly, is a holocaust revisionist. His motivation for that as explained in the book is to act against white dispossession. Not including it means that people are unaware of an attempted defense of the argument.WhiteMan (talk) 04:18, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Eh, what, exactly, is it that you find so convincing about Graf’s screed? To me it looks simply like yet another dime a dozen conspiracy tract, including such standard fare as 9/11 trutherism in addition to Holocaust denial and its rather obvious title. Not including it is not some dire RW conspiracy to suppress The Truth™, but listing every conspiracy theorist work dealing with the supposed white genocide is simply futile and pointless.
The only reason to include Graf, as far as I can see, would be as a representative of your average white genocide conspiracy theorist, since he seems to reproduce standard conspiracy theory fare, incl. linking various kinds of nuttery into a Unified Conspiracy Theory (e.g, the aforementioned trutherism and Holocaust denial is linked with each other and to the overarching, grand white genocide conspiracy theory). ScepticWombat (talk) 07:19, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
White genocide is such a half-assed half-crapped thought, I don't see it worth defending whatsoever. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario!(Mod) 20:34, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
I wholeheartedly agree. My suggestion was a debunking, using Graf’s screed as an example, but I agree that it’s probably not worth the effort. ScepticWombat (talk) 01:27, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
I am always up for debunking. I just find the entire concept completely hysterical, racist, and moronic. It's like trying to defend the idea that every Italian man is out there to replace our culture with mushroom spores. I also find it personally offensive,; by their definition, I am mixed race so it means I am not white and therefore, they count me no better than dead because I am not "pure". --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario!(Mod) 17:21, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
Well that's funny, because world leaders have made statements supporting the white genocide claim. See "Sarkozy : Métissage OBLIGATOIRE pour la France, pas pour Israël": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VF6MezJ884M, also "Visions for 2050": Angela Merkel praises book predicting physical extinction of the German people": https://archive.org/details/youtube-PSPTGTpzbiIWhiteMan (talk) 01:23, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Oh, look: some YT video and an archived one which doesn’t display Merkel supporting the claims but talks to some nobody and merely asserts in the description text that Merkel agrees. The best support for it (and I use the term very loosely) is: ”Einen "Migrationshintergrund" wird es auch nicht mehr geben, "da die Menschen so gemischt sind, dass jeder einen Migrationshintergrund hat".” And that’s from a debate(!) piece from a Springer newspaper authored by a climate change denier and his pal who also happens to (have) be(en) some sort of odd, German cheerleaders for Dubya through ”The Axis of Good”. So, excuse me if I don’t take your “sources” too seriously... ScepticWombat (talk) 20:01, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
World leaders are also not appropriate authorities to begin with. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario!(Mod) 21:15, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

How appropriate is it to call "Christans" a group associated with White people?[edit]

I mean it was founded by a Middle Easterner (assuming you aren't a racialist pseudohistorian), and today Christians exist all over the world and in pretty much every ethnicity. The Ethiopians for example adopted Christianity long before even Rome did (in fact they trace their Christianity all the way back to the guy Philip baptized on the road to Damascus in Acts 8:27-38).Skadooshbag (talk) 17:51, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Considering RationalWiki's demographics (being mainly U.S. or European), I think it's pretty fair game to consider Christians as a group associated with white people. You can also read up on the White Anglo-Saxon ProtestantWikipedia's W.svg designation, which is the majority demographic that dominated American politics for generations. As you can see, the "protestant" part is no mistake. We're not denying Christians of other races, it's that in the context of the U.S. and Europe (which in turn take up most discussion in RationalWiki), there are a lot of white people and a lot of those white people are Christian, moreso than Christians of other races in those countries. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario!(Mod) 19:27, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
Don't forget Armenia. Oxyaena Harass 19:46, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Do we gotta have that Wonka meme?[edit]

It's in a cringey 2011 format. I like the quote itself, maybe we could just have that but without the meme format? -Simoneh (talk) 17:29, 4 April 2019 (UTC)