I was watching this video and I had some questions about it that I couldn't explain, tl;dr:
Can we get a refutation for this video?
Henry Price
Other urls found in this thread:
pastebin.com
imgur.com
pastebin.com
pastebin.com
pastebin.com
archive.org
migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk
migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk
assets.publishing.service.gov.uk
assets.publishing.service.gov.uk
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
Benjamin Baker
RACE STATS
genitics: pastebin.com
Myths: imgur.com
Diversity: pastebin.com
Immigration: pastebin.com
Genocide: pastebin.com
archive.org
Ryan Ross
It's generational. Whites have a below replacement birthrate, causing less whites in the future. Mudskins have a far above replacement birthrate, causing more muds in the future.
Now can this shit thread be removed?
Lincoln Parker
There's no doubt that Jews do in fact control a disproportionately large amount of the media, or that they were heavily involved in the Transatlantic slave trade, or even that there are refugees who commit crimes who are biologically different from the groups they migrate to – my question was about things like proportions, demography of migrants, sources, and duration of staying for these people. The video claims that ethnically white people are not being replaced by non-whites, which I had no countermeasure to. Not that there are different ethnicities – that's well established, but that non-whites are per se "replacing" the white populations of Europe.
Lauren's own sources state that even by 2050 the Muslim population of Europe will be just 10%, not a majority. Europeans still outnumber them 9 to 1, and even considering that whites have lower birthrates than non-whites currently it does not mean they are getting "replaced", as their populations remain the same otherwise.
Joshua Price
It's partially right. The "Great Replacement" isn't real, it's White Genocide. Calling it anything else is a lie.
Grayson Howard
Do you not understand the words "below replacement", in terms of birthrate? Even if there was not a single brown person, the white population would still be going down.
Luke Brown
How is it that, though? Even as more refugees come in its not as if the white populations are decreasing as a result of that – they are decreasing for their own reasons which they need to address themselves, which go even beyond the migrant crisis. Most migrants who come to the UK, for instance, are Polish (white), yet they are the migrant group that commits the most crime of any, so even considering that outsiders are killing the native population by whatever minor amount brings you to see that it's largely a case of white-on-white crime.
Right, my message was that the stagnating white populations are independent of increasing numbers of blacks and browns, so even if there are more refugees from those countries it has virtually no impact on white populations.
Robert Myers
shitskins gloat about white genocide 24/7 and infinite shitlib media sources and the UN and EU themselves confirm that the great replacement is very much real.
why spend time debunking some faggots bad faith argumentation and why spend time defending that mossad whore lauren simonsen?
work on redpilling people, dont get distracted by e-celeb faggotory
Jonathan Allen
Which means they're being replaced, genocided, whatever similar words you want to use. What other description could be used for the decrease of one group, and increase of another, in the same location?
That white populations are independently decreasing, and that brown populations are independently increasing does not change what is happening, other than giving a bit of an explanation.
Carter Ward
This is irrelevant. It facilitates gene flow between the two populations and reduces the political power of the native ethnic population within their own country (which is why it is promoted by the oligarchy).
True.
Only the Polish ones. Shitskins remain.
Nolan Thompson
It's a desperate act of (poorly done) damage control. There is really nothing to refute.
Aaron Evans
Jeremiah Campbell
It is as a result of that. Immigrants make the country shittier and reduce social truat, so then Whites do not want to raise children in that environment. General social decay reduces birth rates, and migration induces social decay.
Owen Perry
...
Joseph Campbell
And this is false
Dylan Torres
Hey guys, spend all your time refuting someone else's hour long video.
And OP_vidpost. Sage.
Nathan Jenkins
No.
Isaac Garcia
Only trash people breed with other trash people; only the miscegenaters are weeded out by this. On top of this, how would the interests of new populations differ from established ones, especially as the new ones come to be the established ones themselves? Within a country there are already different interests, such as between farmers and urban folk, but why would migrants be different?
Can I have a source for that? I haven't seen anything myself to indicate that only non-whites remain
I haven't seen anywhere in the video where it claims that, and I haven't in the OP. In fact I'm against an actual genocide of whites, but the mere changing of ratios doesn't exactly constitute for actively displacing white quantities.
Poles and Romanians both lead in crime, pic related
It's true nonetheless. And it's more so having 20 apples and 1 banana and adding one more banana, and then subtracting one apple for unrelated reasons.
migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk
15.7% of migrants are Polish while the next largest group, Indians, are 6.4%
Camden Jackson
Okay.
How did you not?
It mathematically blatant.
When London becomes majority non-White, ethnic Whites aren't being replaced.
What?
Again, London, your argument is invalid.
Yes, it is. If the overall population is increasing and your ethnic population is decreasing in proportional representation, to the point your capital city becomes majority non-White, the idea that your population is not decreasing is absolute nonsense.
Again: If I have a box with 9 apples and 1 banana, and we add such that it becomes a box with 100 bananas and 10 apples,the fact that the number of apples increased says nothing as to whether or not the apples were 'replaced' by the bananas as far as proportional representation in the population of fruit in the box.
The migrant crisis worsens conditiobs for Whites, making themless inclined to reproduce, which is then used as justification to bring in the migrants, which then lessens White birthrate, etc etc etc.
You're being VERY disingenuous to claim that the migrant crisis is not directly linked with the low birthrate, which further derives from social policy abd media propagandizing, by the same people who want to bring in the foreigners.
Prove it.
Prove it.
Prove. It.
None of us are going to watch your awful video, okay? So don't come here and present that as evidence - you watched the video, right? (Let's be honest, you probable made it.) So what was the data presented that brought you to the claims above? Present it, now, here.
They aren't though, read your Putnam.
That's absolutely ridiculous.
Again, bananas and apples.
If the apples stop reproducing, so to speak, so you flood the box with banananas, you can't then claim that you've had no impact upon the population of apples, doubly so when the whole situation is derivative from the actions of the (((fruit merchants))).
Cooper Myers
This is simply false in of itself. The mere presence of non whites in white countries necessarily displaces whites, and takes away resources that would have gone to whites on every single level, be it housing, social services, jobs etc. The demographic game is inherently zero sum.
Ethan Thompson
>migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk
According to this, 9.5% are polish born, 10.4%(at least, it's only listing the top ten.) are from brown countries, only statistically split up. As if that makes a difference.
Good job shooting yourself in the foot.
Jonathan Bailey
From what year(s) are those violent crime statistics?
Isaac Jones
Isn't that just where they were born though? Their citizenship is displayed in the second column, which appears to be more accurate in describing the kinds of people that move to the UK.
Ryder Russell
Also, that was with me not including India or Bangladesh. Muslims and black countries only.
Eli Nguyen
If you're born in the congo, chances are that you're a nigger. You could be a citizen of whereeverthefuck and still be a nigger. It's more accurate to use the birth location.
Angel Jenkins
No sources on your infographic. Here's one provided by government
And report if you need better insight than one fucking piece of pixels with no source
Not gonna say that UK gov is reliable source of information but I'd rather believe they'd falsificate it in favor of POC
Tyler Phillips
Nah.
Except its not, see London, which is now majority bananas.
>migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk
Yeah, about that.
>This briefing defines the migrant population as the foreign-born population in the UK. Wherever relevant and indicated, the briefing also provides figures for foreign citizens residing in the UK, as well as for recent migrants – defined as foreign-born people who have been living in the UK for five years or less. Definitions have a significant impact on the analysis of the number of migrants in the UK and there is significant overlap between those who belong to the foreign-born group and those who belong to the foreign-citizen group. However having a foreign country of birth does not necessarily imply foreign citizenship and vice versa.
>The briefing includes all migrants, irrespective of their age and employment status. All data in this briefing are taken from the Labour Force Survey (LFS) using the fourth quarter of each year. For information about the limitations of the LFS, see the ‘evidence gaps and limitations’ section at the end of this briefing.
… but then…
>The LFS is a continuous survey of around 60,000 households each quarter. Although the LFS contains spatial information at a regional level, the standard release of LFS data set does not contain local authority identifiers. It is therefore not possible to use the standard LFS to analyse trends and characteristics of migration across local areas. The Annual Population Survey (APS) available since 2004 is more suitable for this purpose.
>The LFS has some limitations for estimating the dynamics of migrants in the UK. First, it does not measure the scale of irregular migration. Second, it does not provide information on asylum seekers. Third, the LFS excludes those who do not live in households, such as those in hotels, caravan parks and other communal establishments. The LFS is therefore likely to underestimate the UK population of recent migrants.
How about that?
Let's also take a moment and talk about the source - The Migration Observatory, out of the University of Oxford. Already, sketchy, but they assure you on their website that they are impartial.
But let's look at their funders.
committed to bringing about socially just change
Does that sound impartial?
Wow, an inclusive and sustainable society? That sounds SUPER UNBIASED!
Again, I am overcome with how unbiased this organization sounds!
Side note:
>en.wikipedia.org
Kek.
Carson Parker
>migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk
Do you have any data NOT from this group of totallllly unbiased researchers in high academia?
In any case…
Hmmmm.
So, basically, this data highl suspect, on several fronts.
Jordan Gomez
Is that because they move to another European country (i.e. still in Europe) or because your faggot countries consider them something else at that point? I.e., naturalized.
Dylan Brown
Even if this data weren't highly-suspect, it doesn't help OPs case, as you say.
Country of Birth:
Poland: 9.5%
Mud: 19.5%
India: 9%
Pakistan: 5.9%
Nigeria: 2.3%
Bangladesh: 2.3%
Also:
Ireland: 4.5%
Germany:4.5%
Italy: 2.1%
How many of those are ethnically Irish/German/Italian, and how many are muds?
Further, I like how OP tried to use data based on country of citizenship… If Polish citizens are 15.7% of the total, how are people born in Poland only 9.5%?
Sounds like maybe some of those Polish citizens weren't born in Poland, doesn't it?
Christian Jackson
Another good point.
Brayden Lee
Oh, fuck, and I missed this part:
Exactly how many muds are coming into Britain as 'asylum seekers' at this point, and when they get to stay permanently, how are they recorded statistically?
Dominic Collins
Those are some very interesting documents as well.
This bit (2nd image) is particularly interesting, in that its so fucking misleading.
Let's be generous and assume 20% of the White population is children, meaning Whites comprise about 67% of the population.
What's 3.6% of 67%?
About 2.4%.
Meaning? More Whites became victims of crime than there are mixed-race or Chinese/other people in the population, let alone those who were victims of a personal crime.
Even if we were to exclude the non-adult population in those figures for demographic representation, I mean… Fuck dude.
67% White of Total Pop -> 3.6% of adults victimized
= 2.4% of Total Pop was White adults victimized
3% Black of Total Pop -> 5% of adults victimized
= 0.15% of Total Pop was Black adults victimized
6% Asian of Total Pop -> 2.6% of adults victimized
= 0.16% of Total Pop was Asian adults victimized
2% Mixed of Total Pop -> 7.4% of adults victimized
= 0.15% of Total Pop was Mixed adults victimized
2% Chink of Total Pop -> 4.1% of adults victimized
= 0.08% of Total Pop was Chink adults victimized
And the prison populations REALLY demonstrate what rascals those Poles are.
Brandon Wright
What is proportionality?
Probably just something those dastardly Poles came up with to cover their tracks.
Henry Myers
Even if we assume that Poles commit half of white crime, which is kinda doubtful since there's a lot of people from rest of Eastern Europe and also some low life Brits, we'd have to deem them 10% as dangerous as niggers.
I'm amazed they even released such info clearly showing power of multiculturalism
Daniel Hughes
Those damn Poles.
Why do they have to be so violent!?
Jeremiah Morales
Those damn Poles, they're just such criminals. So violent and murderous.
Juan Hill
So violent.
Daniel Green
Its just so awful.
Nathan Martinez
Well, looks like OP gave up.
Lazy cunt.
Aiden Murphy
This. Fuck these (((Generation Identity))) kikes.
Easton Rogers
kill yourself retard
Xavier Young
Was about to post and ask about this guy or rather group of guys "debunking" shit. One of the worst things about them is that they act extremely condescending while not really explaining their points outside of refuting parts of the original's video. Though in the case of the anti-BPS one they're right that ti sounds edgy as fuck.
Easton Jackson
You’re done.
Kevin Moore
Ah, so you're another case of dumber then dogshit leftist who doesn't understand basic math.
Eli Lewis
Like trucks of peace and gang violence?
Luis Rogers
Those comments are enough to almost make you lose faith. Post redpolls there, not here. Nobody can see them here except those already aware
Jason Young
that is one of the biggest jew commmie channels on jewtube, the people who watch this shit are the same faggots who think that the MSM arent a bunch of satanic pedophile kikes
Owen Jackson
Where do these people come up with this shit.
Sebastian Gutierrez
Do it yourself instead of pretending to be part of "the group" while doing nothing, faggot.
Grayson Davis
Goddamn, I didn’t think I COULD hate these people more than I already do.
HOW?