tl;dr: Non-Whites don't care about civic duties or virtues, they act as collectives to serve collective interests, and civic nationalists do not have any mechanism at their disposal to change, nor combat, this state of affairs, even as they vehemently protest, on the basis of their civic nationalist principles, White advocates attempting such a feat. These civic nationalists are thus demonstrating that they are operating from an obsolete playbook, attempting to espouse civic nationalist ideals of individualism that were only able to be maintained in homogenous White nations bereft of competition from myriad non-White collectives (each serving their own interests), and yet, despite this failure, demonstrable throughout electoral politics in the US (and the West overall) over the last 30+ years, civic nationalists continue to suggest the old playbook is valid. The conclusion is thus that, if civic nationalists are allowed to attempt to carry out their proposed policies in the US, there will cease to exist a substrate for civic nationalists' beloved Constitutional principles and these principles will cease to exist in application in the US. Self-defeating meme.
Finally, I'd like to sink one last nail into the coffin of civic nationalists' hyper-individualistic ideals, specifically surrounding the conceptual notion of individual judgements in the context of immigration. Regression to the mean. This is a well-documented phenomenon in population genetics whereby the offspring of outliers within a population tend to gradually 'shift' toward a state more in-line with the average of their ethnic/racial group. The result is that judgement of individuals is an entirely static exercise. Typically, those promoting such a methodology of selection will dictate a set of standards which are non-biological in origin, but which effectively act to indirectly ensure that only the outliers amongst non-White ethnic/racial groups will be able to gain entry. Of course, this is innately faulty in practice, in that the individual's offspring are not necessarily going to espouse the traits which meet those standards, particularly if the individual being judged initially was an outlier amongst their kind, which will be the case by-requisite as regards non-White ethnic/racial groups, yet those offspring will be granted voting privileges if born within the US.
Professed ideals of civic nationalism require a substrate of individuals who believe in those ideals in order for those ideals to be espoused in society, and non-Whites do not represent such a substrate, such that demographic replacement of White populations by non-White populations eliminates such substrate, resulting in a cessation of populational espousal of those values at the individual, and thus societal, levels.
Jaxon Brown
My point is that you need a decision-making entity in order to define who the folk are. Even if it's something as rudimentary as a council of village elders, it is a state.
I don't think fascists think each race has their strong points mean they become cuck civic nationalist, muh baste nigger americucks.
That's an entirely different point together.
Hudson Robinson
So a king/leader/fuhrer/kaiser.
Many name, but essentially a king, where responsibility and authority rest upon.
Grayson Butler
No, Nature does that for you. What you need is an organizational framework wherein that conditions is recognized and the participant individuals are held to acting accordingly.
And its less a matter of definition so much as recognition. The definition is already laid by Nature, its simply a matter of the governmental body representing the interests of a group of people recognizing that extant state and acting in accordance to the interests of those so defined.
Parker Robinson
Nature can define whatever it wants, but without enforcement, it means jackshit.
Same argument for the Constitution.
Andrew Barnes
I didn't suggest it did, necessarily.
I repeat: >The problem with Fascism as far as I can see is that, in every case I've examined, it lacks the racial component to a sufficient extent - often it is present, but it is superceded by some other, "cultural" ephemera, which equates to nothing more than a pseudo-civic nationalist perception of culture taking priority over biology, something which I find distasteful and, despite my desires to the alternative, suggestive of a weakness of character or insight.
>Whenever some sort of cultural ideology takes precedence over blood ties, I find myself concerned. This is also why I often find myself dishearted by "identarians". I often hear members of these 'white nationalism' movements/organizations of the current year +X discussing the concept of 'identity', which I find disagreeable.
>Identity IS a factor of what is of import, in actual terms, which is a matter of biology, not of mere internalized self-description, ie 'identity'; this distinction is important, as merely maintaining an identity into the future is not a means via which to maintain, to secure, our people into perpetuity - we are not a mere identity, we are a biological clade of beings, and this material reality is intrinsic to everything about us and our culture, the summation of which being that from whence our collective identity derives.
The Falangists prioritization of a cultural regeneration over a racial regeneration is what I'm referring to here, just as an example - that's not to say they were muh baste nigger americucks by any means, but it DOES mean that they believed niggers were, in essence, their equals in some sense, and viewed interbreeding as a viable approach.
David Reyes
Hence
Carson Bell
Exactly. Of course, the leader can't be too arbitrary in his definitions or he will lose the support of his people. It would be unwise for him to define sheep as part of the folk, for example.
Quite, and he need not be - he is not DEFINING anything, so much as RECOGNIZING a clade which is already defined by Nature.
Yet, IMHO, that is often what Fascism seeks to do, in one form or another, and this then leads into questions of the ol' slippery slope, in that such openness to outsiders - idealistic and compassionate though it may be - tends to lead towards miscegenation and dilution.
