You get 10 seconds to justify xenophobia

white people are scary

It is irrational hate for someone different. No need to be explained.

Xenophobia is a word made by the left to psychologize away the arguments their opponents make against immigration and multiculturalism.

Let's say you're a marxist, imagine I come to you and say "you get 10 seconds to justify entrepreneurphobia" or you're a liberal and you have to justify familyphobia. Would those two be accurate representations of your beliefs?

i agree calling people xenophobes when they are not is wrong, but there exist xenophobes who just react out of emotion

Does this brown person want to work hard and contribute.. or cut my head off?

People will always resort to their most basal tribal characteristics, especially when the chips are down. Prison for example.

Multiculturalism only breeds dissent and discord in a country, rather than unity. People find ways to divide themselves along racial characteristics. It's the way the USA is today, we aren't as efficient as we could be because people insist on identifying as their race instead of nationality first. There's a real chance that it is impossible for humans to reconcile this. The Germanics who sacked Rome had no loyalty to their adoptive empire and this a story that's played out again and again.

When the chips are down, we stick with our own. It is genetic pre-determination.

The problem is the implication that the fear is unfounded. "Oh you don't smoke, what are you, a cancerphobe? Fucking bigot!"

I've yet to see someone with half a brain being called "xenophobe" because he actually irrationally fears foreigners.
Every single time it's because he thinks third world immigrants might not be the best immigrants ever, to use a euphemism.

Instincts exist to keep us alive. If I hate or fear something for apparently no reason, there must still be one and I just don't understand why. Like how being afraid of the dark kept us from being eaten by nocturnal predators.

Large groups of immigrants will at best dilute your culture and at worst cause violent conflict and balkanization. Common folk deserve to live their traditional lives in peace, stop shoving bourgeoisie ideology down their throats

Statistics imply that this is not a founded fear.

Enough with the retarded analogies, this is your 3rd strike.
When someone says any brown person should be deported regardless whether they contribute, who they are etc. - that's a xenophobe. I've seen those.

>that's a xenophobe

No, it is not, as you don't know why they might want them deported.
You can make perfectly reasonable arguments for ethnic homogeneity as a good thing.

>be Somalian muslim
>get refugee status and move to USA
>attend college
>don't like how the media "portrays" muslims as violent
>attempt to murder people

>You can make perfectly reasonable arguments for ethnic homogeneity as a good thing.
You can't.

>You can't.

Except you can, for example things like social trust tend to be higher in homogeneous communities, even after accounting for stuff like ses.

But that's incredibly uncommon

you might not be xenophobic,
but your conquerors will be.

>liberals hate families

Come again?

Imagine the social trust if you had to take people from their homes and displace them with other people.

Explain why ethnic homogeneity outweighs the suffering of minorities necessary to create and preserve this homogeneity

I don't know what is acceptable in their culture.

they need to have the right thoughts and wear the right clothes
otherwise i get really emotional

Their policies often lead to the crumbling of the nuclear family.
Hate is a mis-attribution. Roses are planted where thorns grow.

homogeneous communities can be anything and are not necessarily related to ethnicity

alien is incompatible with me

Xenos have been trying to wipe out or enslave humanity for 40,000 years. If that's not justification then I don't know what is.

I only care about thought when it manifests in behavior. Thought comes from culture. Foreign culture comes from foreign groups. Why would I be for a alien culture being in my nation that could have unfavorable behavior? I cant bar native-borns with questionable behaviors but I can stay vigilant against outsiders.

I want my welfare state not to collapse

ooga booga they're different to us

tribal instincts

Are you able to read? I said "Would those two be accurate representations of your beliefs?"
It's a rhetorical question, the answer is no, liberals don't hate families on average, despite their policies being absolute shit for them.

a) I'm not a utilitarian
b) that's a stupid argument. Imagine I forcefully attach myself to you without your consent. I somehow biologically fuse myself to you. So you decide to start a procedure to remove me from you and I go "EXPLAIN TO ME WHY YOU SHOULD REMOVE ME FROM YOUR BODY" who gives a fuck? I didn't give my approval to any such thing in the first place
c) who says the need to suffer?

I'm specifically referring to ethnically homogeneous communities. I'm sorry if your ideology can't accept this.

>tribal instincts
That are a product of evolution that kept us alive for millennia

But we know better now. Quit being bigoted.
:^)

Yet another retarded analogy. You are a fucking moron man. If Aladdin bought a house in your neighborhood you and your emotional buddies have no right to fuck with his property.
DEAL
WITH
IT

Just like he has no right to subjugate his female family members. But, lets not talk about that.

(not him)
I get called a xenophobe and racist for hating illegal immigrants

How?

Since you apparently like this way of writing.

who
gave
aladdin
permission
to
come
here
I
certainly
did
not
if
immigration
reforms
were
voted
by
referendum
none
of
them
would
have
passed

more freedom -> not forced into family core unit -> family core unit loses

You.

Where immigration reforms=increasing amounts of immigration, especially from the 3rd world.

The Great Society BTFO black families by making fathers disposable in favor of government subsidization.

Substituting father figures with the state.

Prove that a decline in black fatherhood (if such a decline exists) is attributed to social welfare programs.

>who
>gave
>aladdin
>permission
>to
>come
>here
The law, he came here legally. That's done. The deal is made between your state and this person. It's contract, you CANNOT change your mind.
Sorry
YOU GOT CALLED A RACIST????

OMG ARE YOU GOING TO BE OK??

Strong families units are directly related to individual success. How much freedom do you have when you're dependent on the government teat?

> The deal is made between your state and this person. It's contract, you CANNOT change your mind.

Tyranny.

That's meaningless, give some examples

> (You)
YOU GOT CALLED A RACIST????

OMG ARE YOU GOING TO BE OK??

Why do you have to act like you got cerebral palsy. I was stating what's true for many people, that is, getting labels they should not have. Sure it's not a big deal for me (the individual) but in the grand scheme it's an issue as completely different facets of the same concern multiple people share get lumped together and dismissed under this label

>The law

It's almost as if laws can change.
It's almost as if what I and pretty much anyone who thinks like me are advocating for is changing laws.
It's almost as if you don't have any basis for arguing in favor of mr aladin if your only argument is "muh law".

think about the role of women before WW2
think about the role of women after WW2
Think about the state of the average family from the 60s onwards

>Welfare programs created disincentives for couples to get married because benefits are reduced as a family’s income rises. A mother will receive far more from welfare if she is single than if she has an employed husband in the home. For many low-income couples, marriage means a reduction in government assistance and an overall decline in the couple’s joint income — a reduction of benefits by an average of 10 percent to 20 percent of their total income. Because so many of the other programs low-income women rely on — such as food stamps, public housing, Medicaid and public day care — also carry a means test, single mothers are cut off from a wide range of government services if they decide to marry and subsequently raise their income. Over time, for many Black women in low-income neighborhoods, they see the father of their child(ren) as a less reliable breadwinner and partner than the federal government.

You mess with incentives you pay the consequences

>After Onset of War on Poverty, Black Out-of-Wedlock Birth Rate Skyrocketed. The rate went from 24.5 percent in 1964 to 50.3 percent in 1976. It continued to rise rapidly, reaching 70.7 percent in 1994. Over the next decade, it declined slightly but then began to rise again, reaching 72.4 percent in 2008. Some sociologists say that once mothers received government support, the link between marriage and having children was severed in their minds. Fathers were no longer necessary. During the course of the 50 years beginning in 1964, the stereotype of the missing and negligent Black father took hold — in and out of the Black community.

I also said it's a contract. Aladdin came legally(not his fault, the law was as it was), fulfilled the requirements, rented or bought a house in your 100% white neighborhood. He brought his family.

Now you may displace him from his house, you may change the law to target him, you may do anything you like to him. After all nothing is immoral or unjustified when fighting for ethnic homogeneity.

But how dare someone call you or a bad word. That's the worst thing that could happen - to be called a bad word.

A total BITCH is what you are.

You are once again dismissing the power that word has, that any word has, for that matter, when used as a weapon

>But how dare someone call you or
a bad word. That's the worst thing that could happen - to be called a bad word.

Nigger

This. Being called racist is a much more grievous than disparaging someone based on skin color

Nothing to justify, it's just human nature to fear the unknown

>After all nothing is immoral or unjustified when fighting for ethnic homogeneity.

Oh please, this attempt at emotional manipulation is beyond pathetic.
Mr aladin can be payed the price of his house, incentives can be given to him to relocate.

It's also disgusting how you're using this hypothetical guy as a shield to do whatever you want ideologically.

>HEY GUYS I'M GOING TO DO THIS
>wait we don't agr-
>TOO LATE, DONE
>well, we disagree, let's undo this
>WHAT? ARE YOU A NAZI? WHY DO YOU WANT TO DESTROY HIS LIFE

Again, it's pathetic that you're using such cheap emotional manipulation.

one outta three isn't too awful. Just awful.

it's 101 psychology.
You favor the Ingroup (people you share traits with)
You disgrace the exogroup (people you share nothing with)
Simple as that. Humans tend to fear what is not relatable.

Nice map

It preserves my arbitrary traditions and culture in the face of inevitable change.

Gonna need something bigger than that m8

>It preserves my arbitrary traditions and culture in the face of inevitable change.

But non-white western culture must be preserved at any measure!!!!

The cognitive dissonance of the left everyone

non-western*

Socialization is incredibly important to societal development. People who come from places that are not where I come from are possibly socialized in such a way that a meaningful relationship or interaction with this person would be impossible because of the barriers of our own minds.

As much as people love to clamor over individuality or diversity, such things are really distractions from truly connecting to other human beings which is only possible if you are socialized in similar ways.

Essentially, your minds need be in a similar framework, and if not there will always be something separating you either aesthetically or culturally that sits in the back of your minds. Secretly, and quietly it rips your soul from theirs and prevents deeper connection.

This obviously is not true across the board, but with mass immigration you get groups of people who are socialized very differently. This leaves you with two options: Preserve both cultures but maintain barriers/conflict or destroy both cultures by replacing or mixing them.

Xenophobia is a natural reaction for preserving your own personal worldview/socialization. Somehow along the journey of humanity we decided that every human life/value/culture means something universally or should be valued regardless but I think this is bullshit. Value what is closest to you, not what some backwards brown fuckhead living in poverty values. His values simply have no merit to someone socialized in the rich, powerful and creative Western world.

I think I'm Veeky Forums-socialized
I have a pretty hard time connecting with anyone who's not spent a couple years on Veeky Forums, regardless of us living in the same region, whilst I make friends I see irl and all all over the world from Veeky Forums-related groups

Because my pleasure > your pain

>lol I called you a pedo and am telling everyone you're a pedo why so mad?

This is your brain on liberalism

Part of the Veeky Forums "socialization process" is to explain things as they really are. Unlike real life, or even online places that use usernames who often fall to "virtue signaling" someone who uses Veeky Forums doesn't have the component of social interaction. There is no need to signal ones own virtue when the messages I post are not tied to my identity. This can lead to shitposting, but it can also lead to "truth". Truth in the sense that someone will post something that they truly believe. And when you experience this type of "true" social interaction, other types of interaction seem somewhat "fake". The only way to overcome this is to make really good friends that you can talk to about anything.

>wait we don't agr-
>well, we disagree, let's undo this
Organize a referendum to see if people are in favor of changing the law to be able to forcefully remove brown people from their homes - you'll be surprised.

And to think you've probably posted in the past how white people are getting displaced, while you openly advocate for that to happen in it's ACTUAL non meme form to minorities.

I would, if not for the fact that you scream bloody murder at the slightest hint

Their ethics divergence fucks up my space empire

You're so dishonest, it's amazing.
Again, I didn't say "forcefully" at any point, economic incentives work perfectly fine.

>let's have a referendum
>you mean before we vote we're going to have an actual conversation on ethnic and racial identity without people having to fear losing their job
>hahahahah no, no, but we can vote on it!

Absurdly dishonest.

>And to think you've probably posted in the past how white people are getting displaced, while you openly advocate for that to happen in it's ACTUAL non meme form to minorities.

Again, can you make a point without being extremely manipulative? Are you like this irl too?

"displacement" is a thing if you belong to the place you're being removed from. If you squat in my house and I show you the door I'm not "displacing" you the same way you'd be displacing me by appropriating yourself of my house.

You'd think if someone had to be this dishonest to make his point maybe he would realize that ideology is driving him more than reason but I guess not.

Also, even if we don't show the door to any immigrant, why bring more? That's only going to make communities less homogeneous. Since you're not disputing at all that ethnically homogeneous places are better on average, I'm sure you'll agree to putting a stop to immigration.

Biologically speaking , what's more viable? a population that protects their lineage or a population that encourages other populations to replace them?
Justify xenophilia without using moral arguments.

>House analogy
It's funny because brown people own houses

It took me the other 5 secs to captcha

...

You're probably this slimey irl too, right?
I guess african anti-colonial movements also had no right to send colonists away. After all, they owned houses, which seems to be what grants you ultimate power.

Hey, it is difficult to make a post in ten seconds let alone justify the conservative phenomenon of xenophobia.

Oh no, don't look at me, I'm pretty fine with throwing people out of their homes if I don't like them.
You are too. Or are you not? I cannot tell. You may think me slimey, but at least I'm consistent.

Also, different user.

>I guess african anti-colonial movements also had no right to send colonists away
Do you think roughly 2 thousand years worth of technology and culture is an unfair exchange for the explotation of some resources?

I need to rename that file. I was amused by the post.

Some groups are statistically more likely to behave a certain way than others.

I am sure some people secretly hate the Islamic extremist regime they are trapped under and it is easy sitting comfortably at home to say "wow I am so morally upstanding I'd treat them as equals", but if you were risking your property and person you would be more cautious.

Disagree? Please, prove me wrong, I wish I was wrong, I wish I were a "bigot" and the world really is full of gumdrops and rainbows. Go on holiday to Somalia. Leave all your money in a dodgy foreign bank. Let your kids use toys you bought over the internet from some sketchy Chinese business. Take your big assed blue haired gf on a stroll through the favelas.

The facts indicate otherwise and a little buzz at the back of my head keeps saying "nah, liberals are spooked wishful thinkers who are just virtue signalling and don't suffer the consequences of the naive attitudes they push on other people from their sheltered middle class cosmopolitan bubbles".

The statistical differences don't have to be extreme.

Imagine you ran a business where 5% of the time you get screwed over. Prices are high enough to cover the losses but you are competing with other businesses which reduces your profit margins. Now you start selling to another population group and start getting screwed over 10% of the time. 90% are still decent folk, however you still have to raise prices.

The liberals scream, stomp their feet and scold you even though you are only acting in rational self-interest based on the facts. What is the solution? You can't deny facts. You need a livelihood so you can't take losses so you can offer the same price. The burden of supporting this group shouldn't be placed entirely on you. It is unfair to shift the costs to the group that only screws you over 5% of the time. Who is in the wrong here?

>economic incentives work perfectly fine.
That would be a two way transaction. Pay them sums of money for their homes and some more as compensation to send them to "their" countries - maybe they agree, maybe not and if not, well it's a free country.

If it's YOUR house okay, but a neighborhood belongs to the people who own houses there. It's all stupid analogies echoing in your head patching up beliefs, ignoring what's actually happening. DELETE analogies from your mind, stop using them, you'll be closer to rationality.

I am in favor of a strict immigration policy, where only needed, qualified people come after vetting them and their family members. Your outbursts are not helping in that direction.

>I cannot tell.

You must be pretty dumb then since it's quite easy to understand that I'm not for "throwing people out of their homes if I don't like them".

It was a bite more than "exploitation of some resources". Also, it's not like the africans asked for it. Anyway, it's besides the point, it was addressed at the prog who apparently disappeared.

Apparently you are, given that you're apparently fine with throwing brown people out of their homes on the grounds of a house analogy.

>yet another analogy
Yes, sometimes a statistical difference of 5% is enough, sometimes it's nothing.

STOP living in a world of analogies, arguing by analogy is not arguing by symmetry.

Why are you even arguing with me?

You apparently don't disagree with the fact that homogeneous communities are better.
You don't disagree with giving them incentives to leave in order to make those communities better.
So, what exactly are you arguing for? To what purpose?

>Apparently you are

No, user, I'm sorry, try again.

Then by all means, please show me where I have misunderstood. If you will not show me, I cannot learn.

Arguing against forced deportations of people. And I am in favor of homogeneous communities as long as it balances out with individual freedoms.

Yes, we do have to agree about certain core things - sensible law, democracy, order. That's enough homogeneity right there.

I know it's hard to understand balance when you are either sjw or alt-sjw