As the right and left-wing have become increasingly polarized in these recent times, much discussion (particularly online and in alternative media) has gone on concerning the topic of “white genocide”. White men have started to realize that they are becoming hated within their own countries and that government policy, whether intentionally or unintentionally, have them set to become nearly extinct in the coming years.
When one considers that white men are the founders of western civilization and have higher inclination toward wanting to scale back government largess, and are less dependent on the goodies that the left-wing establishment needs so desperately to sell for votes, it is a rather unsurprising statement that they might wish to replace us with a more accepting target audience. The problem of this discussion comes in when there is demand for “proof”.
Of course, when it comes to “proof”, nothing ever seems to cut it for the liberal left, and the burden of proof always falls on the shoulders of those to the right of them. They must never disprove your assertion of white genocide and they must never prove their assertion of gender fluidity or climate change. The burden of proof and disproof falls on the right. Nevertheless, it is important for an advocate of any cause to be able to point to evidence for those that are on the fence.
The black-clad left-wing rioters throwing bottles of piss and Molotov cocktails, however, are a lost cause. When you provide them with evidence, they will claim that you have not provided them with absolute proof. It is a childish game. You can almost hear them as a child in the classroom asking for proof of our own human existence. “How do you know we exist? What if we are an imagination of ourselves? How do I know you are real and that this interaction with you is not merely a unique experience of my own perception? What is perception?…” and so on and so forth. Arguing with the far-left is an exercise in futility as they devolve into absolute nihilism.
However, there is evidence to the theory of white genocide, and strong evidence at that, which may be very convincing to those with intellectual honesty.
Before we go on, though, we must define our terms. The current dictionary definition of the term “Genocide” is “the deliberate killing of a large group of people, especially those of a particular ethnic group or nation.” If the wiping out of a large group of people is not deliberate, or the deliberateness is in question, the term “soft genocide” has often been used. Those that mock the people who believe in white genocide, however, would have you believe that our major concern is merely people having mixed race children because white women do not want to sleep with them. They themselves seem to be the only ones who regularly use this definition.
However according to the United Nations Genocide Convention, one of the five internationally recognized definitions of genocide includes, “Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.” Promoting policies which result in the destruction of whites would fit this definition.
The fact of the matter is that many whites in the United States (and Europe as well), for good reason are concerned about the fact that they are projected to become a minority by the year 2050. As of 2012, whites began to account for a minority of births in the U.S. Is this merely an act of nature? No. It is promoted and funded by the state, and the examples are numerous.
Perhaps the most convenient and subtle way to change the demographics of a nation or replace the native population is through immigration policy. Millions of immigrants from the third world pour into our nation year after year, and this is not some natural occurrence as many left-libertarians might have you believe. It did not always use to be this way after all.
The immigration act of 1965, known as the Hart-Celler Act comes to mind. Passed under the Lyndon B. Johnson administration, the Hart-Celler act abolished current quotas that were put in place to favor immigration from Western European nations, and replaced it with a preference system that favored people of family relationship to current U.S. Citizens or permanent legal residents. But the Act of ’65 did not end there, as it increased the cap on visas for people from the eastern hemisphere, and decreased the number of attainable visas for people of the western hemisphere.
This immigration bill continues to be the framework for today’s immigration policy, which favors diversity over cultural compatibility, and this is perhaps the major driving factor in demographic changes in our country. In 1990, the Diversity Immigrant Visa Lottery program was created, in the same spirit as the act of ’65. The lottery makes 50,000 permanent resident visas up for grabs every year, and the program aims to make the immigrant population in the United States more diverse. The program selects applicants from countries with low rates of immigration in the five years prior at random. As of 2017, an estimate of around 20 million people apply for the lottery each year, and approximately 100,000 people receive permanent residence as a result of it. Nearly all of these are non-whites.