Is New Hampshire too white?

[Indo-Malaysia]

Except there is no need to 'fix' a problem that does not exist.

"How can we make this area more attractive to [DEMOGRAPHIC]" is a problem that doesn't exist?

Why does it need to be more attractive?

[Vassenor]

"How can we make this area more attractive to [DEMOGRAPHIC]" is a problem that doesn't exist?

Why does it need to be more attractive?

You'd have to ask the people doing it.

[Bakery Hill]

Why does it need to be more attractive?

You'd have to ask the people doing it.

The article did and got an answer, but you're not game enough to repeat it for some reason.

[Ifreann]

"How can we make this area more attractive to [DEMOGRAPHIC]" is a problem that doesn't exist?

Why does it need to be more attractive?

Because they have an ageing population and a lot of people left unable to work because of opioid addiction/abuse, and non-white people are, apparently, becoming an ever larger proportion of the population.


Plus, you know. Gotta get that cheap labour, #FuckWorkersGetMoney

[The South Falls]

Why does it need to be more attractive?

Because they have an ageing population and a lot of people left unable to work because of opioid addiction/abuse, and non-white people are, apparently, becoming an ever larger proportion of the population.


Plus, you know. Gotta get that cheap labour, #FuckWorkersGetMoney

You'd be good at labor administration in China.

[Soviet-mongol]

The problem ako with white states is they tend to vote Republican. For the Democrats to win it is necesarly to settle refugees there.

[Uxupox]

Once you go black you never go back.

[Ostroeuropa]

Settlements would be purposefully calling in people to settle somewhere just to change the demographics. There is a getting on with people from around the world and then there is purposefully changing demographics with an agenda

So how is that happening here?

Populations across the west, especially their white sections, have frequently protested and voiced their opposition to mass migration and so on. But our governments are not representative of the people, rather, they are representative of the interests of oligarchs. The peoples of the west are having their lands settled because of policies imposed on them against their will by international elites for their financial and political benefit. Neo-imperialism doesn't attach to a particular nation, but to mobile capital, and business elites with no firm attachment to any people, nation, or culture, but more loyalty to a system akin to a world-empire of finance and capital. The west is being colonized against the will of its people at the behest of these elites and this financial empire, were it up to them and were the governments actually representative, there would be much different rules to migration. When you couple that with policies that exploit these populations to an extreme extent and cause rising costs of living and so on in order to give those financial elites even more profit, these policies cause declines in the birth rate which exacerbates the situation. (Likewise, they have gutted social mobility in these nations and keep us subjugated to their rule by dictat. They have fucked over education too, since they can then save money and not have to pay for it, but foreigners can have educations, because business elites are here and avoiding OUR taxes, not theirs. So they free-ride on foreign experts and import them, getting the benefits of a robust public education system without having to pay for it.)

It's more on the scale of Churchillian casual indifference to millions of indians starving to death for the benefit of his in-group, than actively malice of a Hitlerite variety, but it's there.

We are being colonized. The consequence of us being the headquarter nations of these financial elites are policies that are causing the decline of our people and our replacement with other groups, because this benefits the financial elites.

Colonization was always about profit. The means to acquire that profit have changed, the methods have changed, but fundamentally, it's still colonization for profit and imposing policies on a population that mean you profit, they decline in number, and you move people in to replace them.

We are simply worth more to business elites as a slowly suffocated and smothered demographic denied resources and denied the opportunity to have flourishing lives and families, giving them the opportunity to sit amidst our declining tribe and civilization and pay taxes so low that no society can survive on them (And indeed, it isn't surviving.), we are simply worth more to them when they pay us so little and charge us so much that we cannot afford to raise the next generation to a sufficient extent to replace ourselves, so that's what they're doing to us, and they'll import replacements instead.

It's still imperialism. It's still colonization. The means and methods have changed, but fundamentally, it's there.

When you cease to view our governments as OUR governments, but instead as arms of a world financial empire of olligarchs, (studies like the harvard study showing the US is an oligarchy, not a democracy, support this.) it becomes strikingly clear. Against our will, we are being colonized for profit.

This view is obscured by the current narratives associating historical empire and imperialism and so on with race rather than systems of exploitation and elites.

The reason whites are in decline and being replaced is because we have the business elites in our midst, and they turn civilization into a desert because it is simply more profitable for them. If we kicked them out or changed our policies, and they moved to Arabia or some shit, we'd bounce back, and slowly, Arabs would start declining because of the system they would impose upon them.

It is imperative if whites want to survive to turn against capital and business elites, and left wingers need to drop this whole notion that what is happening is fine or even progress and people critical of it and saying it's terrible are racists. Pointing out what is being done to us is vital to stopping it.

Meanwhile, the demographic situation also benefits capital in that it can set us against eachother while continuing to exploit us, the same system of exploitation successful empires used during the colonial era. It's also notable that the narrative pushed by the media in political terms seems tailor made to do one thing, demonize nationalism, keep whites disunited, keep them unable to organize. (This is "Emergent" order, the most profitable path taken, rather than deliberate.) When we become a plurality instead of a majority, that will probably ease up, but pitting demographic against demographic will keep happening. Nationalism has long been a tool of colonized peoples to resist systems of international financial exploitation that do not have the best interests of their nations people at heart, and has a successful track record in that regard.

The battle in the media currently between "National" and "International" is a feud between petit business elites with localized interests on a national scale, and major financial elites with financial interests all over the globe. (See the elites who backed Brexit versus those who opposed it.) It is a feud between the Upper class and the UpperUpper Class. People who think the Upper class will let up on the policies of social devestation are fooling themselves. The pay too low to raise families, the taxes too low to maintain society, the immigration and colonization? That will remain. What will change is the upper class will change trade laws to cockblock global capital and protect their business interests from much larger international corporations.

The only thing that can save whites and the west is a rejection of both of these groups and a system that starves both our society and our families out of being able to flourish and grow.

Immigrant populations already here are not better off either. If they imagine their descendants being here, they're wrong. British Pakistanis are as fucked over as British whites. They too, their children, will simply be replaced by another immigrant family, in time, when their descendants can no longer afford to flourish due to having no social mobility, poor education, and shit wages. You may have come to the UK to be a doctor. Your grandchildren will be unemployed, poorly educated, and unable to afford a second child, and they will see a Doctor who moved here from Pakistan too. The squalor and decline of immigrant communities is obscured from them by their replacements also being non-white in much the same way as the squalor and decline of the white community is obscured by the elites also being white. When you eliminate first and second generation, the picture for immigrant communities, contrary to popular belief, doesn't look better, it looks worse. You have come here to have your family lines ended by capital.

Progressive attempts to promote "Diversity" in the successful members of society are missing the point. Social mobility under capitalism is largely speaking a myth (see picketty and his studies of wealth-holding in the UK since the 1400s.), so heavy handed attempts to obscure this fact are required as the population changes. Even with zero racism, the elites would remain white even if the population was half minority, because social mobility isn't actually there. This would prompt people to realize capitalism has lied to them.

Progressivism is therefore a useful tool for elites to lie about this and pretend it's solely due to racism, and because it frames things as about Race (Thereby obscuring the culprits from being singled out, international business elites.).

We would do better to make this a matter of The British versus The International elites while acknowledging how each subset of the British population and their communities, including whites, has been harmed by those traitorous nomadic bandits. We are told we must make our society accommodating to these people and that we need them. But they thrive on squalor, decline, and exploitation, and the only way to appeal to them is to make our society excel in those qualities. The evidence is all around us. We may be worse off initially when they leave, but we will be finally able to rebuild and build a better future, we will be better off in the mid and long term, rather than surviving on the decaying and declining husk of a civilization we have inherited as it rots around us from tolerating these people and their demands.

[Bear Connors Paradiso]

The solution is obvious: New Hampshire should go Logans Run and kill/eat those who are over 30 to deplete the necessity for workers. Fish, and plankton, and sea greens, and protein from the sea!

[USS Monitor]

The problem ako with white states is they tend to vote Republican. For the Democrats to win it is necesarly to settle refugees there.

New England doesn't have that problem. It's overwhelmingly white and votes Democrat anyway.

[Ethel mermania]

The problem ako with white states is they tend to vote Republican. For the Democrats to win it is necesarly to settle refugees there.

New England doesn't have that problem. It's overwhelmingly white and votes Democrat anyway.

Sssh, your reality is blowing the narrative

[Vozh]

I don't care one way or the other. Identifying yourself by race or ethnicity is primitive.

[Jamilkhuze]

Immigrant populations already here are not better off either. If they imagine their descendants being here, they're wrong. British Pakistanis are as fucked over as British whites. They too, their children, will simply be replaced by another immigrant family, in time, when their descendants can no longer afford to flourish due to having no social mobility, poor education, and shit wages. You may have come to the UK to be a doctor. Your grandchildren will be unemployed, poorly educated, and unable to afford a second child, and they will see a Doctor who moved here from Pakistan too. The squalor and decline of immigrant communities is obscured from them by their replacements also being non-white in much the same way as the squalor and decline of the white community is obscured by the elites also being white. When you eliminate first and second generation, the picture for immigrant communities, contrary to popular belief, doesn't look better, it looks worse. You have come here to have your family lines ended by capital.

This is a complete non-sequitur from the thread topic, but it's worth pointing out that British Pakistanis are mostly of rural, working-class origins in Pakistan, which probably explains a lot of socioeconomic and cultural factors about their community.

The British Mirpuri community comprises people in the United Kingdom who originate from the Mirpur District in Azad Kashmir, Pakistan. While no accurate statistics are available, an estimated 60 to 70 per cent of British Pakistanis in England have origins in the Mirpur District.

The community speaks the Mirpuri/Pothohari which are dialects of the Punjabi language and are mainly from the Muslim Jatt and the Bains/Vains Rajput community of Azad Jammu & Kashmir.[1] The first generation Mirpuris were not highly educated, and they had little or no experience of urban living in Pakistan.[2]

The Mirpuris live in some of the most segregated areas of Britain, and their children attend the most segregated schools.[8] The British government has made attempts to improve community cohesion by nurturing a sense of shared or collective national identity. One programme designed to encourage greater social mixing includes the busing of students of Pakistani origin to "white schools", in an attempt to bridge the divide between the British Pakistani and white British ethnic groups.[9]

Going to the OP, New Hampshire becoming less white in the future isn't necessarily a bad thing, provided it comes naturally as a consequence of being more open to younger Americans moving in from elsewhere. There's nothing inherently wrong with any place in the US being "really white".

[Uttland]

How can someplace be “too white”? Does it matter? This is is just free material for the Alt-Right to fearmonger with.

[Miedzy]

Too white? That's silly.

[Dark Socialism]

I don't care one way or the other. Identifying yourself by race or ethnicity is primitive.

Primitive isn't bad

[Kustonia]

I don't care one way or the other. Identifying yourself by race or ethnicity is primitive.

Identifying yourself by race and ethnicity is biological and natural, there's nothing primitive about it.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

I don't care one way or the other. Identifying yourself by race or ethnicity is primitive.

Identifying yourself by race and ethnicity is biological and natural

It's not biological

[Kustonia]

Identifying yourself by race and ethnicity is biological and natural

It's not biological

Prove it

[El-Amin Caliphate]

It's not biological

Prove it

https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... sts-argue/

[Kustonia]

Prove it

https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... sts-argue/

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TyDnq1sgDN0

[El-Amin Caliphate]

https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... sts-argue/

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TyDnq1sgDN0

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/America ... _(magazine):

"American Renaissance (AR or AmRen) is a monthly white supremacist online publication founded and edited by Jared Taylor"

white supremacist

Yeah no, you're gonna have to cite a more reliable source than this.

[Kustonia]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TyDnq1sgDN0

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/America ... _(magazine):

"American Renaissance (AR or AmRen) is a monthly white supremacist online publication founded and edited by Jared Taylor"

white supremacist

Yeah no, you're gonna have to cite a more reliable source than this.

Jared Taylor provided enough reliable scientific information in the video. The genetic variation is substantial enough for many differences in the human population.

[Dark Socialism]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TyDnq1sgDN0

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/America ... _(magazine):

"American Renaissance (AR or AmRen) is a monthly white supremacist online publication founded and edited by Jared Taylor"

white supremacist

Yeah no, you're gonna have to cite a more reliable source than this.

Wikipedia calls Allsup Far-Right whiles he's just a normal Conservative and it also calls Richard Spencer a White Supremacist while he says he would let Half-White People into the ethnostate
Not a reliable source either about the right-wing either

[The South Falls]

As people say, why is our weight of words so light that we must preclude them with our race?