And here is my response to why it will never work.
You’re not fully grasping the complexity of the human brain.
Think of the brain as a software application—one that has undergone many updates over time. Just like software evolves with new features and optimizations, the human brain has adapted and changed as we’ve progressed through different eras of history.
When you say it's "natural" for people to want to stick with their own, you’re referring to the Human Brain Version 1.0—the primitive, default settings we relied on for survival in the early stages of human development.
In this version, the brain operates on instinctual programming, much of which is designed to detect threats and prioritize survival. Back then, "those others"—people from different tribes or groups—were often perceived as dangerous simply because they were unknown. Fear of the unfamiliar was a default survival mechanism, causing early humans to cling to their own group for protection.
So yes, based on those default settings, it makes sense that people would instinctively feel more comfortable with others who look and act like them. This is deeply ingrained in our brain's original programming from thousands of years ago. When you talk about the "natural" desire to stick to one’s own, this is what you’re referring to.
But here’s what you’re missing: Humans have been evolving for thousands of years, and our brains—just like software—have gone through numerous "updates" since version 1.0. We no longer live in isolated tribes, and the circumstances that shaped our early instincts have changed drastically.
Over time, human societies have gained new experiences, learned from interactions, and built complex systems of communication and cooperation. These experiences have rewired our brains in profound ways:
Cultural Interactions: Different groups of people have interacted for centuries, and in many cases, learned to coexist peacefully. The human brain has adapted to recognize that "those others" are not always a threat but can be allies, partners, and friends.
Common Language: Today, many groups speak shared languages like English, which bridges the gap between cultures. This shared communication helps dissolve the "us vs. them" mentality that was so deeply embedded in our brains in earlier stages of evolution. Now, we can understand and relate to people from different backgrounds in ways our ancestors never could.
Biological Integration: We now understand that humans across all ethnicities can intermarry and procreate, producing children that represent a blend of different cultures. This knowledge challenges the idea that we are entirely separate from one another. The biological possibility of mixing genes across ethnic groups shows that we are fundamentally interconnected.
Globalization and Shared Resources: The modern world is interconnected in ways early humans could never imagine. Today, our survival often depends on cooperation with people from different backgrounds, whether in trade, innovation, or peacekeeping efforts. The brain's capacity for understanding cooperation has evolved beyond tribal loyalty.
My final thoughts.
The idea of sticking to one's own may have been vital in Human Brain Version 1.0, where fear and survival ruled every decision. But in the modern world, with all the knowledge, experiences, and connections we've gained, we’ve moved far beyond those default settings. Our brains are now capable of much more nuanced and evolved thinking.
To cling to the outdated, instinctual fear of "those others" is to deny the growth and potential of the human brain. It’s not just about what’s "natural"; it’s about recognizing that humans are capable of adapting to new realities. We have the ability to transcend our original programming and form meaningful connections across all kinds of differences. That’s the true potential of the modern human brain.
And here is my response to why it [ethnocentrism] will never work.
What you are ignoring is that IT ALREADY HAS WORKED -- in White societies, in Japan, and to some extent in other societies, as well.
Whether or not it has worked in black societies (Africa) is another question.
But those of us who love the history of Europe, and all it has accomplished over many centuries, are throwing off the propaganda and rediscovering our pride in our own history.
If blacks can be proud of their history; if jews can be proud of their history; if others can be proud of their histories, then so can Whites. But Whites are the ONLY ones who others claim cannot or should not be proud.
Yet, our people accomplished more than all the others, combined.
We are looking at the recent history of the attempt to destroy ethnocentrism IN WHITE SOCIETIES ONLY, and realizing that this "progressive" era has been an absolute disaster ... for White people.
It has been entirely destructive, and NOTHING about it has been an improvement.
Naturally, we consider the possibility that maybe Whites would be better off going back to the idea of having a society without non-Whites, by letting them do their thing "over there" and us doing our thing "over here."
I will give you a hypothetical.
Let's say that we split Texas. Blacks take half and Whites take half.
Within 20-50 years, I can predict with reasonable accuracy that the history of each race will play out again in the future, and Whites will have a thriving society, while blacks will be in chaos and poverty. Sure, some blacks can thrive, but on the whole, the rest of the black population will bring down the whole of the population (see: Africa).
The problem today is that the chaos comes mostly (not entirely, but mostly) from outsiders, from the perspective of White society.
Yes, I know that non-Whites will cry about these statements, but these statements are for the Whites to consider, and I don't care what anyone else thinks.
The biggest problem most Democrats have is that they have these ideals of how they think society "should" be, and how we should acheive such an end goal. Their ONLY solution to the "how" part is more government spending.
OK, but they NEVER take a step back to LOOK at the RESULTS of their ideas. Did their ideas from 50 years ago about education, poverty, liberty, etc. ACTUALLY ACHEIVE THE RESULT they said they wanted?
In every single case, the answer is: NO.
That's BECAUSE their solution is FLAWED. It does not work the way they think it will because people are more complex than just pushing a button and spending money (money that is STOLEN from other people).
The same is true of the experiment in desegregation and the forceful interaction of different races.
IT HAS NOT WORKED ... for Whites.
That is my point, and non-Whites will either (a) not get it, or (b) not accept it, because it has benefited them, and they don't know what their own life would be like if the Whites just picked up their toys and left town (hint: look at Africa).
There is nothing wrong with exploring these ideas. Only the propagandists who want to destroy White society push that narrative. And it is long past time that we ignore their opinions on this subject.
Sure, we all should work together to destroy the Deep State, who come in all colors (though jews are vastly over-represented), because those people harm us all.
That, however, does not change anything else I said here.
It is the Deep State who has pushed these harmful ideas in the first place. These ideas are not natural to humans.
THAT IS WHY they don't (and won't ever) work.
We should accept that and deal with reality as it is, not as someone in an ivory tower thinks it should be.
And here is my response to why it will never work.
You’re not fully grasping the complexity of the human brain.
Think of the brain as a software application—one that has undergone many updates over time. Just like software evolves with new features and optimizations, the human brain has adapted and changed as we’ve progressed through different eras of history.
When you say it's "natural" for people to want to stick with their own, you’re referring to the Human Brain Version 1.0—the primitive, default settings we relied on for survival in the early stages of human development.
In this version, the brain operates on instinctual programming, much of which is designed to detect threats and prioritize survival. Back then, "those others"—people from different tribes or groups—were often perceived as dangerous simply because they were unknown. Fear of the unfamiliar was a default survival mechanism, causing early humans to cling to their own group for protection.
So yes, based on those default settings, it makes sense that people would instinctively feel more comfortable with others who look and act like them. This is deeply ingrained in our brain's original programming from thousands of years ago. When you talk about the "natural" desire to stick to one’s own, this is what you’re referring to.
But here’s what you’re missing: Humans have been evolving for thousands of years, and our brains—just like software—have gone through numerous "updates" since version 1.0. We no longer live in isolated tribes, and the circumstances that shaped our early instincts have changed drastically.
Over time, human societies have gained new experiences, learned from interactions, and built complex systems of communication and cooperation. These experiences have rewired our brains in profound ways:
Cultural Interactions: Different groups of people have interacted for centuries, and in many cases, learned to coexist peacefully. The human brain has adapted to recognize that "those others" are not always a threat but can be allies, partners, and friends.
Common Language: Today, many groups speak shared languages like English, which bridges the gap between cultures. This shared communication helps dissolve the "us vs. them" mentality that was so deeply embedded in our brains in earlier stages of evolution. Now, we can understand and relate to people from different backgrounds in ways our ancestors never could.
Biological Integration: We now understand that humans across all ethnicities can intermarry and procreate, producing children that represent a blend of different cultures. This knowledge challenges the idea that we are entirely separate from one another. The biological possibility of mixing genes across ethnic groups shows that we are fundamentally interconnected.
Globalization and Shared Resources: The modern world is interconnected in ways early humans could never imagine. Today, our survival often depends on cooperation with people from different backgrounds, whether in trade, innovation, or peacekeeping efforts. The brain's capacity for understanding cooperation has evolved beyond tribal loyalty.
My final thoughts.
The idea of sticking to one's own may have been vital in Human Brain Version 1.0, where fear and survival ruled every decision. But in the modern world, with all the knowledge, experiences, and connections we've gained, we’ve moved far beyond those default settings. Our brains are now capable of much more nuanced and evolved thinking.
To cling to the outdated, instinctual fear of "those others" is to deny the growth and potential of the human brain. It’s not just about what’s "natural"; it’s about recognizing that humans are capable of adapting to new realities. We have the ability to transcend our original programming and form meaningful connections across all kinds of differences. That’s the true potential of the modern human brain.
What you are ignoring is that IT ALREADY HAS WORKED -- in White societies, in Japan, and to some extent in other societies, as well.
Whether or not it has worked in black societies (Africa) is another question.
But those of us who love the history of Europe, and all it has accomplished over many centuries, are throwing off the propaganda and rediscovering our pride in our own history.
If blacks can be proud of their history; if jews can be proud of their history; if others can be proud of their histories, then so can Whites. But Whites are the ONLY ones who others claim cannot or should not be proud.
Yet, our people accomplished more than all the others, combined.
We are looking at the recent history of the attempt to destroy ethnocentrism IN WHITE SOCIETIES ONLY, and realizing that this "progressive" era has been an absolute disaster ... for White people.
It has been entirely destructive, and NOTHING about it has been an improvement.
Naturally, we consider the possibility that maybe Whites would be better off going back to the idea of having a society without non-Whites, by letting them do their thing "over there" and us doing our thing "over here."
I will give you a hypothetical.
Let's say that we split Texas. Blacks take half and Whites take half.
Within 20-50 years, I can predict with reasonable accuracy that the history of each race will play out again in the future, and Whites will have a thriving society, while blacks will be in chaos and poverty. Sure, some blacks can thrive, but on the whole, the rest of the black population will bring down the whole of the population (see: Africa).
The problem today is that the chaos comes mostly (not entirely, but mostly) from outsiders, from the perspective of White society.
Yes, I know that non-Whites will cry about these statements, but these statements are for the Whites to consider, and I don't care what anyone else thinks.
The biggest problem most Democrats have is that they have these ideals of how they think society "should" be, and how we should acheive such an end goal. Their ONLY solution to the "how" part is more government spending.
OK, but they NEVER take a step back to LOOK at the RESULTS of their ideas. Did their ideas from 50 years ago about education, poverty, liberty, etc. ACTUALLY ACHEIVE THE RESULT they said they wanted?
In every single case, the answer is: NO.
That's BECAUSE their solution is FLAWED. It does not work the way they think it will because people are more complex than just pushing a button and spending money (money that is STOLEN from other people).
The same is true of the experiment in desegregation and the forceful interaction of different races.
IT HAS NOT WORKED ... for Whites.
That is my point, and non-Whites will either (a) not get it, or (b) not accept it, because it has benefited them, and they don't know what their own life would be like if the Whites just picked up their toys and left town (hint: look at Africa).
There is nothing wrong with exploring these ideas. Only the propagandists who want to destroy White society push that narrative. And it is long past time that we ignore their opinions on this subject.
Sure, we all should work together to destroy the Deep State, who come in all colors (though jews are vastly over-represented), because those people harm us all.
That, however, does not change anything else I said here.
It is the Deep State who has pushed these harmful ideas in the first place. These ideas are not natural to humans.
THAT IS WHY they don't (and won't ever) work.
We should accept that and deal with reality as it is, not as someone in an ivory tower thinks it should be.
LOL!
It has already worked??
THEN WHY THE HELL DOES SO MANY PEOPLE WANT TO COME TO THE STATES???
Do you know how many EUROS have left their land to move to the US???
Isn't EUROPE a UPTOPIA of whiteness?
Why do people around the world want to come to a society built on WHITE ideals by WHITE people, but they don't clamor to move to Africa?
I don't know why you seem baffled.
The question answers itself.
WHO gets credit in BUILDING something sir!
LOL.. now you are saying that whites have some sort of super power that there are now color coded IDEAS??
How does that work???
You have all you need.