This is the first wave of these conflicts. The Olympics end on Sunday, after which the French police and military will almost certainly shrink away from their capital city and Paris will again become unsafe, crime ridden, and hostile to the native French.
It would not be hard to imagine a scenario in which the French also mimic what they've seen in England after the inevitable racially motivated crime happens again. Calling people racist and denying them the safety their government is supposed to promise will no longer go unchallenged.
All the adults who could understand this as an ethnic conflict already do. The coming generations of young Whites need to be taught this is there is going to be any hope.
"...there will come a time when the invasive foreign elements will eventually outnumber the natives and at that point, all semblance of “democracy” will cease..."
THAT ship has pretty much already sailed, especially in the EU. It is pretty much a "democracy" in name only.
I really don't understand the attempt to ascribe cultural and political differences to purely ethnic differences. This is demonstrably false across the board. Simply look around and in your own family, you'll see everyone is variously part of "team red" and "team blue" within each family and even within each ethnic group. It is obviously not an ethnically-based division at all. The assertion is absurd and not productive.
This blue/red teams model reminds me of Haidt's moral foundations work. It does seem plausible to me that the 'liberals' are trying to elevate the cost of exhibiting conservatism. Whatever the true case of affairs, what 'liberals' always fail to notice is that these moral foundations arise in all cultures. They stupidly believe that they offer something to all religions and ethnicities, apparently forgetting the fact that the conservatives in the non-native groups actively despise many modern liberal values. So they placate those conservatives of other stripes, foolishly thinking that they will turn and join them. They wont. All you do is signal your weakness. If the regime had any balls they would be equally robust with conservatives of all stripes, but instead we get the two-tier approach we have seen in recent days. It's ill thought-out and will ultimately backfire, by which point it will be too late. I am genuinely curious to see an inter-faith Conservatism arise, wherein Jews, Christians and Muslims put aside their differences and come together to oppose the Left, although I am not holding my breath for that one.
The jews are the financial and intellectual engine of all leftist anti-White and anti-normalcy policies in the world. Including jews in a coalition insures the coalition will eventually be an extension of international jewish supremacism. Before you include Islam in a coalition, it might be best to ask yourself 'Why aren't there people in Muslim-majority' countries?' Why is it the job of the White world to take in every disgruntled intellectual from every part of the world?
My point of view is a little different. I'd argue empires have endured centuries while being full of different ethinicities. Rome and Austria come to mind. Rome's lifespan depends if you count "byzantium or not", but it is a remarkable example of an empire where a thousand peoples lived and still thrived. The Holy Roman/Habsburg/Austrian Empire also existed for a thousand years before it was deliberately destroyed by foregin forces. In my opinion what made these empires last was the power and authroity of the state to repress any dissent from the minorities. These empires were not scared to use brutal violence against ethinic rebellions, while our Western Nations are, to quote scarface "pussies waiting to get fucked". There is also a question of state legitimacy. Both the Holy Roman Empire, Austria (before it made huge concessions to the Hungarians), and Rome were Monarchies that promoted Splendour and Grandeur, and our Western Nations promote degeneracy and moral/finabcial corruption.
TLDR: Multi ethinic empires depend on both a Harsh Government and a Legitimate State that promotes it's glory.
I am not sympathetic to this view because it assumes that the core situation is 'Whites' being disloyal to 'Whites' because of different 'moral loyalties'. But, oddly, 'Red' Whites and 'Blue' Whites live very much the same way (adjusting for income) having nearly identical 'moral loyalties' around issues of hearth and home.
The question I pose the author is 'What factors lead to Blue national politics being so anti-Blue?'
It has been objected elsewhere that this (sterilisation of illegal entrants) would involve imposition of a "medical" intervention in violation of the Nuremberg code and would pave the way for enforced sterilisation (or injections) on the wider population. But this is to misunderstand the situation. We are at war. In wars, combatants find their bodily integrity violated, for example, by a bullet. Illegal migrants are, at the least, committing trespass. A public announcement such as the one I recommended would be fair warning. As for the "slippery slope" argument, those orchestrating the ruin of our democracies will find excuses for whatever they decide whatever we say or leave unsaid.
Since I was born the global population has not doubled, but tripled! This means that most people are always close to many people, and they are prevented from removing themselves easily and quickly to a place of solitude, to commune with nature in some form (possibly only farmland or woodland). The need for occasional solitude is as great and widespread as the need for occasional company.
The riots are not 'across Britain' but,are mainly in England,with a few in Cardiff and Belfast. None in Scotland and the people who wanted to cause trouble in Glasgow on Wednesday night didn't bother to ho, once they ground there would be no-one to gight there, as the Scottish anti-racist protest moved to Saturday in Edinburgh
Scotland is different from England and we respect incomers, even English ones, as long as they do not display English Nationalist anti - foreigner behaviour!
The media are much to blame as they accept the establishment framing of immigrants as the cause of poverty in Britain, to cover up the fact that it is government policy to let the rich get richer whil ordinary people get poorer. It is rich greed that makes others poor!
A first counter-measure would be to declare loud & clear that all illegal immigrants will be sterilised.
This is the first wave of these conflicts. The Olympics end on Sunday, after which the French police and military will almost certainly shrink away from their capital city and Paris will again become unsafe, crime ridden, and hostile to the native French.
It would not be hard to imagine a scenario in which the French also mimic what they've seen in England after the inevitable racially motivated crime happens again. Calling people racist and denying them the safety their government is supposed to promise will no longer go unchallenged.
All the adults who could understand this as an ethnic conflict already do. The coming generations of young Whites need to be taught this is there is going to be any hope.
"...there will come a time when the invasive foreign elements will eventually outnumber the natives and at that point, all semblance of “democracy” will cease..."
THAT ship has pretty much already sailed, especially in the EU. It is pretty much a "democracy" in name only.
The most important thing is young men are fighting.
The young men are fighting at last and get all support regardless, not that their elders are in a position to criticize anyone’s mistakes.
I’m 57. STFU and fall in.
I really don't understand the attempt to ascribe cultural and political differences to purely ethnic differences. This is demonstrably false across the board. Simply look around and in your own family, you'll see everyone is variously part of "team red" and "team blue" within each family and even within each ethnic group. It is obviously not an ethnically-based division at all. The assertion is absurd and not productive.
This blue/red teams model reminds me of Haidt's moral foundations work. It does seem plausible to me that the 'liberals' are trying to elevate the cost of exhibiting conservatism. Whatever the true case of affairs, what 'liberals' always fail to notice is that these moral foundations arise in all cultures. They stupidly believe that they offer something to all religions and ethnicities, apparently forgetting the fact that the conservatives in the non-native groups actively despise many modern liberal values. So they placate those conservatives of other stripes, foolishly thinking that they will turn and join them. They wont. All you do is signal your weakness. If the regime had any balls they would be equally robust with conservatives of all stripes, but instead we get the two-tier approach we have seen in recent days. It's ill thought-out and will ultimately backfire, by which point it will be too late. I am genuinely curious to see an inter-faith Conservatism arise, wherein Jews, Christians and Muslims put aside their differences and come together to oppose the Left, although I am not holding my breath for that one.
The jews are the financial and intellectual engine of all leftist anti-White and anti-normalcy policies in the world. Including jews in a coalition insures the coalition will eventually be an extension of international jewish supremacism. Before you include Islam in a coalition, it might be best to ask yourself 'Why aren't there people in Muslim-majority' countries?' Why is it the job of the White world to take in every disgruntled intellectual from every part of the world?
My point of view is a little different. I'd argue empires have endured centuries while being full of different ethinicities. Rome and Austria come to mind. Rome's lifespan depends if you count "byzantium or not", but it is a remarkable example of an empire where a thousand peoples lived and still thrived. The Holy Roman/Habsburg/Austrian Empire also existed for a thousand years before it was deliberately destroyed by foregin forces. In my opinion what made these empires last was the power and authroity of the state to repress any dissent from the minorities. These empires were not scared to use brutal violence against ethinic rebellions, while our Western Nations are, to quote scarface "pussies waiting to get fucked". There is also a question of state legitimacy. Both the Holy Roman Empire, Austria (before it made huge concessions to the Hungarians), and Rome were Monarchies that promoted Splendour and Grandeur, and our Western Nations promote degeneracy and moral/finabcial corruption.
TLDR: Multi ethinic empires depend on both a Harsh Government and a Legitimate State that promotes it's glory.
Gates of Toledo come to mind
Ethnicity comes from the Greek word ethnos, “nation”, which shares the same cognate as natal—birth.
I am not sympathetic to this view because it assumes that the core situation is 'Whites' being disloyal to 'Whites' because of different 'moral loyalties'. But, oddly, 'Red' Whites and 'Blue' Whites live very much the same way (adjusting for income) having nearly identical 'moral loyalties' around issues of hearth and home.
The question I pose the author is 'What factors lead to Blue national politics being so anti-Blue?'
It has been objected elsewhere that this (sterilisation of illegal entrants) would involve imposition of a "medical" intervention in violation of the Nuremberg code and would pave the way for enforced sterilisation (or injections) on the wider population. But this is to misunderstand the situation. We are at war. In wars, combatants find their bodily integrity violated, for example, by a bullet. Illegal migrants are, at the least, committing trespass. A public announcement such as the one I recommended would be fair warning. As for the "slippery slope" argument, those orchestrating the ruin of our democracies will find excuses for whatever they decide whatever we say or leave unsaid.
Since I was born the global population has not doubled, but tripled! This means that most people are always close to many people, and they are prevented from removing themselves easily and quickly to a place of solitude, to commune with nature in some form (possibly only farmland or woodland). The need for occasional solitude is as great and widespread as the need for occasional company.
The riots are not 'across Britain' but,are mainly in England,with a few in Cardiff and Belfast. None in Scotland and the people who wanted to cause trouble in Glasgow on Wednesday night didn't bother to ho, once they ground there would be no-one to gight there, as the Scottish anti-racist protest moved to Saturday in Edinburgh
Scotland is different from England and we respect incomers, even English ones, as long as they do not display English Nationalist anti - foreigner behaviour!
The media are much to blame as they accept the establishment framing of immigrants as the cause of poverty in Britain, to cover up the fact that it is government policy to let the rich get richer whil ordinary people get poorer. It is rich greed that makes others poor!
You forgot to mention the best-unmetioned, and that undercuts nearly all of your otherwise worthy analyses.