A riposte. Red font emphasis added.
This is what the “movement’s” fetish with “racial purity” has given us.
I warned all of you fetishists:
The concept of (absolute) racial purity was originally a racialist meme, one which had particular relevance in the New World environment of the intermingling of highly distinct racial groups (European, Amerindian, and Negro), Negro slavery, and fears of miscegenation. However, today, in the age of genetics, racial purity has become an “anti-racist” concept, a meme of the anti-White Left, a weapon to be wielded against the concept of racial preservation. The leftist argument goes like this:
Premise 1: The reality of race and the legitimacy of racial preservation depends upon absolute racial purity.
Premise 2: Absolute racial purity does not exist (as scientific studies tell us).
Conclusion: Therefore, there is no such thing as race, and racial preservation is illegitimate and irrelevant.
So, this is a logical argument that comes to a false conclusion because of a faulty premise: Premise 1. Premise 2 is however correct. Genetic studies tell us that groups heretofore thought “pure” are likely the result of ancient mixes of other groups.
But, hey, don’t listen to me. Instead follow the great and good Durocher and Ash Donaldson. Victory awaits!
It is also funny how “there is no such thing as indigenous peoples” applies to Europeans, but not to, say, Amerindians or Australian Aboriginals. Curious, that.
“There’s no such thing as a Dane or a Swede or a German.”
Hmmm, how about: “There’s no such thing as a Jew or a Nigerian or a Chinamen.” Mr. Netanyahu, tear down that wall! Nigeria, hand over your land to Bushmen and Hottentots! China, hand over your territory to all who wish to invade; after all, your national existence is an illusion!
I have, of course, dealt with the question of “what is indigenous?” See here.
A simple one sentence definition: A group is indigenous when it is the oldest extant group inhabiting a territory in which the group underwent ethnogenesis.
Of course such groups are not “pure” – why should they be? And why should fast talking Jews and their Goyishe kop puppet liars stop the analysis at “Africans and Russians?” Why not Homo erectus? Why not self-replicating RNA molecules floating around in the primordial soup?
And by the way, you stupid bastard, ancient steppe peoples were not genetically equivalent to modern Russians. They were not “Russian” any more than a Cro-Magnon from Provence was “French.”
In my case, I’m an indigenous swarthoid and damn proud of it! Skin darker than a Nigerian and nostrils wider than an Angolan!
Twenty years ago, my mother was bedridden and near death. It was one of the last times I was with her, perhaps the very last time—I’m not sure. She was drifting in and out of awareness, sometimes just saying things out loud—random things, clear and coherent but not connected to each other.
So I was sitting there by the bed and heard her say: “I don’t mind dying. At least I knew England when she was England.”
Yeah, Derb, if your mother was still alive, would she see England in the faces of her grandchildren?
There is no truth to the rumor that Greg Johnson, being taller than Richard Spencer, scorns Spencer as an incompetent manlet. No truth at all! But, hey, focusing on a bagel dwarf and “incels” helps distract from things like this. At this point, I think these guys are just trolling us. They can’t still be serious about racialism, can they? I mean, it’s a joke, right?
Yet, Taylor can’t be there because he’s banned from the EU. The whole thing is curious.