You guys are literally fucking faggot emotional liberals when it comes to this shit, and why? Most frequently conservative claims are just logical but this is just emotional and based on anecdotal pictures of ugly mulattos, happas, 56%ers, etc.
It's good to see an anon like
>>7734787 this justifying a distinction in fitness of people based off of race. Unfortunately it doesn't actually go the argument against race mixing since the studies involved only study persons of one background rather than multiple.
Ever since Christchurch I've wondered about the ideal of America being a "melting pot". Sure it was founded by Europeans but in a globally interconnected world the idealism of wary and huddled masses is the epitome of a better place to live than whatever slums which people die in every day. So what is better, a civic nation of different people slowly and inevitably losing their individuality, or (as Tarrant wishes for) nations with individual beliefs, customs, and races, (fascist states)?
If you want to identify as part of a larger white hegemony who created the world, you will justifiably be horrified at the present state of things. Already Indians and Asians make up 2/7 people on Earth, and yet their entire civilizations are either directly credited to or largely influenced by Europeans. It's almost as if the whites built the world only for other races to break it.
If you are truly a white nationalist, I'd make this recommendation: seek space development. Earth's gravity well is the ultimate genetic bottleneck, and the more whites that seed the more will live in the future.
Getting back to America, I think if white birthrates have already peaked then white men should colonize as much as possible right now before the race ratio is even more offset to where whites are in a smaller minority, so that they'll contribute less to the future fully-mixed persons. The women should of course not interbreed, as they have different sexual prerogatives.
