Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

319

I've been running into this on X when I speak out against foreign invasion and White displacement.

I usually go with a mix of:

1) We conquered it fair and square, the history of the world is full of populations at war and being displaced. Why should I sit back and allow it to happen to the civilization the White man has built here?

2) That was 300+ years ago, what happened in the past doesn't justify these actions in the present.

3) Native Americans were raping and killing each other long before we got here anyways.

I'm not wholly satisfied with this retort. Is there a better angle or argument?

I've been running into this on X when I speak out against foreign invasion and White displacement. I usually go with a mix of: 1) We conquered it fair and square, the history of the world is full of populations at war and being displaced. Why should I sit back and allow it to happen to the civilization the White man has built here? 2) That was 300+ years ago, what happened in the past doesn't justify these actions in the present. 3) Native Americans were raping and killing each other long before we got here anyways. I'm not wholly satisfied with this retort. Is there a better angle or argument?
You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (38).
[–] • 5 pts 13d

There is no argument. What difference does being native make?

The argument is about multiculturalism: importing niggers into white society destroys white societies. Some people want that, or at least believe they want it.

The argument is all societies need to be protected by borders. There is no case to be made for mixing different races or even different cultures. Each culture tries to protect itself by surrounding itself with others of its kind. Eventually, one culture will win.

[–] • 6 pts 13d

So ignore the statement as a red herring and continue making the points you listed. A valid response. They will still harp about the poor native Americans, but I suppose you aren't going to convince them no matter what you say. These arguments are to benefit any third party reading.

[–] • 2 pts 13d

People throughout history have overtaken lands. Romans took over England before the Saxons before the Danes.

The question of native is irrelevant. It’s a question of what culture we want to succeed us - do we want our culture to persist or do we want to be overtaken like the Babylonians or the Egyptians or the native Americans?

[–] • 2 pts 13d

It’s a question of what culture we want to succeed

Yes, this.