Opening -

1. Civic Nationalism will either be toothless or basically thought-policing people who come in, when a diversity of values is actually good

2. Civic Nationalists cant even define Western Culture or how to detect it in prospective immigrants or how they will 'assimilate people'

3. Ethnonationalism just has to achieve ethnocultural continuity, not 100%

4. Based on PISA scores, Australia and Canada see very marginal benefits (if any). A nation like Singapore, despite a high starting IQ, sees noticeable benefits and has policies to maintain a Han supermajority. So there isnt a reason to not have some element of racialism

5. Their civic identity will go out of style or be redefined later on

6. They wont get their ideal system but some weaker compromise. So it seem irresponsible to not have an element of racialism as 'insurance' in a sense. Saying Civic Nationalism will be "just as good" as ethnonationalism in preserving the West, in my opinion, is a dodge with this in mind. It could be just as good but you wont get your ideal system so why not be honest and add an element of racial particularism to proceedings?

Rebuttal - Academic Agent's plan is simply unproven: the idea that we can disregard demography whatsoever as long as the immigration system is meritocratic. While White Nationalism, for lack of a better word, is proven. And it need not be the most exclusionary form of white nationalism where 100% of the State is white or we aim for that. We can adopt a singaporean model of maintaining a racial supermajority by law while still permitting some inflows of outgroups. I think this is much safer than betting on his system.

The primary recipients of his system would be East Asians and the Chinese in particular whom I will focus on as they are the ascendant group. Who already have their own societies, and while possessing a higher IQ have not as yet led the world due to issues governing their own nations. Issues which could be, and in places like Canada are, exported to their new homes along with a familiar form of ethnic conflict. In Canada in particular they have adapted quite well to the Progressive climate, a prominent Chinese professor named Henry Yu even calling Canada a White Supremacist Nation when he weighed in on the debate of forign investment in real estate (basically wealthy Chinese buying propertym, raising prices for natives too). The implication is clear since this debate is a veiled debate about immigration and identity: the cure for white supremacy is Chinese immigration to him.

And I am singling him out but we can find plenty of examples of ethnic politcking among Asian diasporas. Be it a corruption suspect using the diaspora communities to hide from authorities, and making himself useful to Trudeau who sought to woo their votes, or China clearly viewing its diaspora as a potential fifth column since the spies we catch spying for China tend to be chinese, and the more generic but not yet manifested realities of ethnic conflict which we can reasonably expect to rise if and when the numbers of any group rise. We can see some inkling of this with China's colonization of Africa. These are examples of how prominent and politically active members of the Chinese community interact with their wider community. Moreover, based on what little data there is, Chinese diasporas tend to vote Left. One can read much from this: the Left typically supports more statist interventions in the economy (which one sees in their nations too), the Left is pro-diversity and anti-white so it makes sense to ethnically politick in this manner. The exact reason why is not known but those seem to be the most likely in my opinion, both would be an issue for Academic Agent's notion of what makes nations great (free markets and inclusive institutions). Which I share by the way.