BoRn of fire said:
HP. Hoodedcobra666 said:
Should ther be no blacks in America ? Why should ther then be whites in America ? Wich are all European ? Wich race does America actuali belong to? Should there be whites then in South Africa ? Sorry I mean to cause no stir but this is bugging me alil who is correct and rightful in that sake I'm not completely educated about American history aren't Mexicans also somewhat alil racially close to American Indians ? How does this all work
These work by what is called...Politics.
These are very complex political questions that cannot possibly be answered in one reply or simply, as the situation is extremely complex. It's easy to ask questions in this case but very difficult to answer them, as this is mostly politics.
To answer in another way, all races have their ancestral homeland or the places where their species have lived from, a source. Africans have Africa, Europeans have Europe, those who united themselves later and became Hindus have India, Middle Easterners have the Middle East, and Mexicans have Latin America, while Asians have Asia.
The above did not get created by morals or human made law but from where people actually reigned or lived for the longest time intervals.
America is a first time "Experiment" that started as an Ethnic state [White people] and then was hijacked, infiltrated and casually the people in it replaced. Now it is losing it's "Ethinic State" identity and it is become a menial national identity, which is still valid, as it was the case in specific types of Empires before.
Some people argue it has lost the ethnic identity for a while and therefore it can no longer claim ethnic state status as this is not the case within the country anymore. Jews try to make the same happen to Europe.
Before the creation of a nation, what one has is only tribes living in specific places, and since there is no law, there is only "Might makes right", in which cases others have fared well and others have went down, others expanded and others lost. Might makes right is a lot like the law of the jungle, the strongest do win, and this is what is imposed most of the time in these cases.
For example, where the jews reside, it's obviously not their land but of the Palestinians. But the jews have enough influence to take the land and replace them gradually until they take it over completely. Nobody cares or dares to question any historic evidence or why and if this should happen, as this is a move of might, and not of logic or anything.
These things are subject to change. Normally, people should have like ethnic rulership within their continent and nation, but this doesn't happen anymore as the jews pushed any movement of people so far that they actually try to replace one people with another people.
Within this context there will be implosions and potentially violent redistribution that aren't going to be part of a natural order after a point. For example, Muslims will definitely, unless stopped, try to overtake Europe after a point, and the enemy will try their best to replace native Whites in America, in a form of "Might makes right", but without war as typical parasites and cunts would go about it.
We have to remove the enemy first to actually have the mind to solve these things and not kill ourselves in ape mode, so the enemy has to go first, and then politics will clean up considerably to find solutions for things.
