3 grounds

1. Incorrect analysis of the problem, all the problems are the result of 3 chief of causes: 1. leftists (slow march, ingroup nationalism was a norm theye eroded too, and they need non-whites to go this far). 2. State keeps growing bigger and less trust (diversity and non-whites worsen both) 3. low IQ immigrants need welfare, and will vote for it. Wales and Scotland are bad, but they arent Detroit. I agree it is a sickness of course. But I dont see a solution to this victimhood rent seeking, only ways to make it less bad. These narratives give people power so all pandering will continue

I agree all are problems

2. Incorrect characterization of what they are fighting for. Anglo-American Culture. But non-whites dont share it anyway. No way to be fixed either. I agree it is a great system. But the Constitution has been basically redefined by judges drunk on new ideas. It isn't as lasting as a people. Britain and America however, were ethnostates too. And since opening themselves to the world, forces opposing this have gotten stronger

3. Economically unsound policies. Political power for moral good -> anti-capital policies. Forming racial guilds, nat'l government subsidies for industries which help whites. I'd argue the same goes for non-whites, except worse. The continent are free-wheeling capitalists compared to the global south.

- Rebuttal:

If we take race as being essential, what you say makes sense. But we know race is consistent divider of these cultures with no way of bridging this. Individual SJWs dont matter (SJWs arent all white btw). the Indian reminds me of Nikki Haley.

I can grant individual cases, but the broad trend is that this is a racial issue. On aggregate you have to assuming these things are deterministic

What are the right incentives. The 87 IQ guy will lose the debate every time to the 142 guy of course. the 142 guy could argue the superiority of his system easily

Questions:

1. Doesnt know how to convert non-whites.

2. SJWs pander to non-whites, what does that suggest about the source of their power

3. Can it even be fixed?

4. Wouldnt it be reasonable to limit the influx of "anti-freedom" groups until we fix these issues in a reliable manner (ie we make blacks into mini-sowells)

5. Blacks in America still had worse outcomes than whites before the Great Society hence why they supported

6. Splitting people up is good, but they will eventually congregate if they have the numbers. So we should still not permit that. Singapore doesnt.

7. Skilled economic migrants? What if they side with SJWs can use their influential positions?

Sowell Questions:

1. Compared to what: Compared to the future Japan and China will be seeing. Compared to the past of an ethnostate we used to have. And the ethnostate is a preferable future to Brazil De Nuovo.

2. At what cost: ethnostate (deciding on a eurocentric demography and to promote a whiter demography) is less costly than becoming Brazil 2.0, a fallen world economy essentially. And we would see a rise in the cost of goods, due to labor shortages. But that would be short term compared to the lost tax revenue which we are currently kicking down the road. I prefer long term benefits over short term costs

3. What hard evidence: Well I would argue the deficit of evidence is more on the other side who need to prove their multiracial or civic system will work out and havent. We cant even close IQ gaps despite billions of dollars going into it. But I would say the history of ethnostates and the persistent failures of multiracial policies, and attempts to bridge the gaps, are my hard facts.

4. And then what: Well I think the issue of race is resolved. But I would look at automation to reduce the need for cheap labor, genetic engineering and AI too since those sciences are important for the future. And the last two are of interest to China so it is a quiet arms race in a sense