Who is responsible for White Genocide?

On November 21, 2015, in Commentary, by natalt
Greg Johnson of Counter Currents publishing has penned an article titled “White Genocide” which questions whether people who aren’t aware that mass immigration and assimilation could lead to Whites being assimilated out can be held responsible.  Greg takes the view that it is likely there are people who are aware of the consequences, and therefore should be held responsible.

But when such people are informed, their reactions fall into several categories. Some will simply refuse to accept that white extinction is taking place. Of those who accept that white extinction is actually happening, some will wish to stop it, and others will not. Of the latter, some will simply not care, and others will actually cheer the process on.

There is, however, a difference between people who might sign on to policies promoting white genocide after the fact and those who might conceive and execute such policies before the fact and with full awareness of their consequences. What evidence is there that such people exist?

First, the burden of proof needs to be shifted. For is it really plausible that the leaders of dozens of white nations have adopted similar policies antithetical to the long-term survival of their own peoples, yet none of them knew what they are doing?

Yes, it is fashionable to deride politicians for thinking only in terms of the next election. But that is not really true. Politicians are, for instance, rather far-sighted when it comes to their personal career ambitions and plans. Beyond that, our ruling elites do not consist simply of democratic politicians. Moreover, the ruling elites in every form of society are noted for thinking and planning ahead. Both government intelligence agencies and private think tanks are in the business of generating long-term predictions based on current trends, and planning accordingly. Thus it is just not plausible that our leaders are unaware of white extinction. They either don’t care about it, or they want it to happen.

Indeed, there is ample evidence of both occurring, that is, people seeking to “undermine homogeneity“, and people who after having the facts pointed out, then seek to justify their position rather than reconsider it.  Greg then writes at length about the Jewish influence, which although exists, can act as a buffer, or even act as a defence of White people who cheer our own demise.

The question of whether people who perhaps haven’t deliberately sought to bring about a mixed race utopia in all and only white nations, but still support the basic principles which bring it about (third world immigration, assimilation, anti-racism and efforts against pro-white speech and sentiment) should be held accountable is an important one.  Particularly when there may come a day when this question becomes more than theoretical.

In this authors opinion, there is little doubt that everyone supporting the program must held as being responsible for it.  The crux of the White Genocide argument is that there are people who are supporting a program which will logically lead to white people being assimilated out through intermarriage and mass migration.  The logical conclusion is obvious, and anti-whites admit to it, admit it is desirable and cannot put forward an argument or proof that this won’t happen.  Anything which may be done to prevent this outcome is labelled by anti-whites as “racist”.  Anything.  Whether that be a single white nation putting in policy to stay white, or white people segregating, or white people suggesting against interracial marriage.  They are ALL racist.  They don’t support limiting immigration.  They don’t suggest that maybe mass non-white immigration can cease when a threshold is reached.  So anti-whites support everything which will result in whites being assimilated out.  They reject ANYTHING which may be put forward to prevent it.

Now, if this has been pointed out to them, and they cannot refute the argument, then they are then aware they are committing Genocide.  Note that at this point, most anti-whites then don’t refute, but rather rationalise it, suggest it doesn’t matter, suggest that perhaps it’s deserved, or no big deal, or its “progress”, or better than the alternative, or whatever.  They justify Genocide rather than prove it’s not occurring.

It is irrelevant whether they “know what they are doing” or not.  It has been pointed out.  Many times.  Not only by pro-whites, but by anti-whites.  I simply don’t buy that they don’t know.  The argument that “when the races are mixed, there will be no racism any more” has been put forward ad nauseum.  Everyone is familiar with it.  Everyone knows that it is only white nations which must become multiracial.  How else do they know to get upset when Hungary doesn’t take in refugees but not care when China which has millions of empty homes begging for people doesn’t?

Suggesting that perhaps anti-whites aren’t aware is a bad strategy.  They say all the time that whites must go.  They seem to be well aware of any perceived Islamophobia, of any comment which might cause angst for a person of colour, but aren’t aware of people saying it will be great when Whites are gone?   Ignorance is no excuse.  If someone tells you that the additive you put into coffee is going to kill someone, and you cannot prove otherwise, then if you continue to do so, you are responsible for the ensuing death.

There cannot be any room, nor acceptance of ignorance of this matter.  Once they have been told of the consequences of current policies and ‘morals’ leading to Genocide, and they’ve failed to prove that it doesn’t logically lead to it, then they are obligated, morally, if they don’t support Genocide, to reconsider their position.  If they refuse, they are accepting the outcome.

It must be put in such a stark matter.  It must become unacceptable to be neutral on this issue.

Tagged with:
 

6 Responses to Who is responsible for White Genocide?

  1. Observer says:

    One contributing factor to white genocide is homosexuality, which prevents normal, natural procreation, as nature intended it to be.
    Funny that Greg Johnson fails to mention this,,, oh wait, I think I know why….

  2. natalt says:

    That is true that homosexuality would lower the birthrate, however homosexuality is only a small portion of the population.

    It is true that white people are not having children above the replacement rate, however no race ever just disappears from not having children. It is Genocide which finishes a people off, and in our case, it will be mass non-white immigration into ALL and ONLY white nations, and pushed assimilation and intermarriage. There will always be about 95% of the population, thereaboute, give or take a few percent which are heterosexual. If those, many, most will have children. It is WHO they have children with, which is the defining question. If through mass migration and assimilation and “Diversity” those people end up being more and more non-white (and as the percentage of mixed race people increased, the likelihood of this increases too), then eventually, we would presume (as anti-racists keep telling us they want), that there would be few to no white children, even thoughmany children are still being born.

    That’s the crux of the matter. It’s not whether children are born or not. There will always be children born in Australia, UK, Germany, Italy, Sweden, France, its whether they are white children or not.

  3. Elizabeth says:

    As we lose demographic, economic and political power, life will just become much worse for our children.

  4. The g Factor says:

    I don’t think homosexuality has much to do with it – There have always been homosexuals and many do marry and have children. A few of the problems causing low white birth rates could be:
    – the absurdly high cost of housing in our large cities
    – chronic unemployment at around 5 or 6% or higher – back in the 1950s and 1960s it never got above 3% and generally was much lower
    – most government support to families is means tested and hence goes to the less bright, less conscientious and those not wanting to work – which could explain why migrant nationalities from places not well favoured on the IQ map (such as the Sudan) have much higher fertility rates than those from smarter countries
    – the apparent need for young people to stay in education much longer even though they seem to end up in the same jobs their less educated parents did
    – a general loss of national and racial consciousness with a resultant disinterest in the future of our race or nation.

    On the other hand native Australians have higher fertility than migrants in general and as a country we do better than most north Asian or European nations. By tweaking the welfare and taxation system, such as less direct means tested handouts and tax deductions for those with children, we may be able to raise fertility rates among our whitest and brightest. It would certainly be worth a try.

  5. admin says:

    Homosexuality has always been quite a small proportion, and it’s been more or less that way since ancient times.

    However, birth rate is beside the issue. The low birth rate IS a problem, a nation can recover from that. Culture changes. Economic conditions change. It’s far more difficult to just step out of ingrained demographic change, and this is the primary problem.

    Also, the White Genocide meme focuses on intent not results. There is intent to demographically shape all nations primarily inhabited by Europeans, and it is this intent which is the problem. That intent is expressed whenever a politician recommends ‘Asianisation’ or demographic change. That intent is expressed whenever a Liberal says that the world would be a better place without whites. It’s expressed whenever someone says a town, city, state, country, movie, awards ceremony is ‘too white’. It’s also done whenever someone like Merkel shirks their social and national responsibility and betrays her nations by disregarding her welfare. Those who consider her actions as acceptable are contributing.

  6. Please post my link mentioned as well. This is the real truth about H F Verwoerd.

    http://www.radiofreesouthafrica.com/apartheid-biggest-british-lie-ever-attributed-verwoerd-part1/

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please enter CAPTCHA *