Why did fascists, both past and present...

>iceland doesn't work

what did he mean by this

But that's precisely it: there were no ethnostates at the time. Just cunts organized by clan/city/ruling house.

Although they're being cute in thinking there wont be internal conflict since *surprise surprise* societies are based more on just race.

You know there are ethno-states in Europe RIGHT NOW with no ethnic conflict? I mean I get that you're probably American or British or someone else who lives in a multikulti shithole so it's a foreign concept to you, but ethnostates do work, it's been empirically tested.

>Muh Japan.
Then you'd have to create the *exact* pattern of Japanese history.

In addition you ought to have no history of extensive colonialism that spread your culture to foreigners and thereby enabled them to be sort-of copies of your culture and able to immigrate to your shit. Sure the Jap Empire had a short lived colonial stint but the acculturation was either so limited or so short lived Taiwanks and Gooks are still pretty Chinese/Korean. Compare this to say Indians who can English or Latino Americans. Part of the big reason immigration to Japan is so few - besides their own strict policy- is because at the end of the day it is a very alien culture.

Western country's cultures? Not so much.

>Ethnostates that are barely a hundred or 200 years.
>"Do work."
Lel. Kingdoms & Empires lasted longer. Let's fucking see how well nation-states fare.

>implying monarchies and ethno-states are mutually exclusive

Postwar Europe has been mostly composed of ethnostates and until tensions caused by mass migration began to appear, it was mostly fine.

The exception to this were Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union, and we saw how that turned out.

>WE WUZZERY means nation-states existed prior nationalisms.
K.

Daily reminder that only Paris spoke what is now considered French during the days of Kingdom and the Revolution literally practiced cultural genocide.

why do leftists hate ethnostates so much?

why is it so imperative that every world capital becomes a carbon copy of Rio di Janeiro and Paris combined?

Really vulcanizes my vagina

German empire was both a monarchy and a nation state. I fail to see what makes you this assblasted.

I think we should go case by case. In Germany's case it's sensible to have an ethno-monarchy since there's a fuckload of Germans and German territories, but for tiny non-countries like Hungary or Slovakia it would've been better living in a multi-ethnic empire, on their own they're way too weak.

Its because it a quote and not a greentext story. You know, what the arrows were meant for? Its poor form to put a quote and then write directly below it.

>why can't you type
like this

and instead you

>type

like this

Not lefty but there's an argument for it: areas of the world historically were occupied by non-ethnostates and just pushing nationalism out of the blue causes chaos because of all those shitty groups pushing for "muh nation-state" despite being able to live in a multinational state for millenia.

I personally think people should just remain as they were: historic ethnic states (i.e. like Japan) ought to be ok to practice their nationalism while historic multiethnic states (i.e. like China) should be free with their multi-national identity.

In Europe alone the Hapsburg, Romanov, and Ottoman empires were fucking destroyed and replaced by shitty nation states just because everyone (including the "core nation" group) wanted their special snowflake state. For the sake of said special snowflake state.

>Hapsburg, Romanov, and Ottoman empires were fucking destroyed and replaced by shitty nation states just because everyone (including the "core nation" group)
Yeahhhhh you're a moron

You should stop assuming everyone opposed to the nation state is a leftist. Some of us are monarchists, nationalism is actually to the left of us.

>I think we should go case by case.
Yeah, In that I agree with you.

>Spotted the Butthurt Balkanite.

Its because I'm British I know its fucking bullshit.

Pre-roman: Celtic tribes fighting all the time.

Roman Britain: Celtic tribes fight Romans.

Post-Roman Britain: Anglo-Saxons invade, goes rather well, despite them being a different ethnicity.

1066: Battle of Hastings.

1300-1500: 100 years war AND the War of the Roses.

Form then on, numerous wars between Britain and the rest of Europe up until 1945.

Where in this mess of wars, many of which I missed, did black people or indians or chinese ever agitate?

Because I like to make it easy for people to read. Its a habit I have from essay writing.

Britain isn't a nation state you bong.

So will the nationalists try to send the Polish back to Poland?

For all the news on Muslims, all the hate-crime against Polish people in the UK isn't making headlines.

What about all the Germans in Poland cities, making more money than ethnic Polish?

How about all the local minorities in France whom the French government wants to erase with its "everybody must speak French and be ethnically French", "Algeria and Corsica and Brittany are French too".

Muslims are really only one segment of the rising tensions Europeans are having against each other. Ethnic states HATE other ethnic states more often than not.

I see you're new on here, it's a signature spacing of reddit and facebook faggots,so stop doing it.

Borders will redrawn in blood once again deal with it cuck no body wants minorities and nobody wants to be a minority

Nation states killed most of old Europe and it was mostly France, Britain and USA doing it and encouraging it.

>Austria Hungary HAS TO split between Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Austria, Romania, Yugoslavia etc
>NO NO NO BRITAIN AND FRANCE MUST REMAIN COMPACT! INDEPENDENT SCOTLAND? INDEPENDENT BRITTANY? WHAT ARE YOU CRAZY?

It was textbook divide & conquer. Several decades of doing this came back to bite even France and Britain in the ass when they lost their colonial empires, and now Europe is a third rate continent full of tiny non-countries deciding whether they want to be a bitch of USA, Russia or China.

England wasn't a nation state until around 1000AD, so what the fuck do you want me to say? All of Britain was involved in celtic warfare, the fucking Romans were fought in Anglesey.

>I see you're new here

Now you prove you're not from the Donald you little shit.

Will Switzerland divide into 3?

>2013
Like I said, you're a fucking newfag.

>So will the nationalists try to send the Polish back to Poland?

In Britain? Nationalists aren't in power and the Tories have gaurenteed current EU citiens won't be sent back.

I had the courtesy not to use my trip outside of /s4s/ rather than using it to shitpost.

>In Britain? Nationalists aren't in power and the Tories have gaurenteed current EU citiens won't be sent back.

Just like people said Trump would never be elected President.

Never underestimate the mob, especially when they hold the ability to control the government and tax your money.

I haven't tripfagged in literally years, my trip dates to at least 2008 on /sp/ but that shit was archived only on easymodo which has been gone for years.
Also /s4s/ is a newfag containment board.

>Just like people said Trump would never be elected President.

People also said Niribu wouldn't destroy the world in 2012. Just because people said something wouldn't happen and it did doesn't mean that always happens. UKIP are losing voters to the Tories at the moment and the Tories aren't renowned for their nationalism, especially nativism. Theresa May is likely going to be PM until 2024.

>Also /s4s/ is a newfag containment board.

/s4s/ is populated by like 20 people who've been there since 2013/2014. I wouldn't even say /b/ is a newfag containment board anymore since its fallen into obscurity as a general porn board.

/pol/ is the new newfag attraction, its the world on everyone outside of Veeky Forums's lips. Its the new /b/.

>/pol/ is the new newfag attraction, its the world on everyone outside of Veeky Forums's lips. Its the new /b/
True, which is why I completely avoid /pol/ despite having pretty /pol/ tier views. Nothing but absolute cancer and reddit spam on that board.

>believe that if they can make an ethnostate everything will be perfect with no infighting
Why do you think they believed that?

>A couple of phenotypical characteristics that factor in difference of appearence in the human population matter in any objective way.

Why do you care so much? Do you correlate haplogroups with inherent virtues?
Not even trolling. I know this is /pol/ bait, but can you give me a reasonable, scientific reason for caring so much about a perceived conspiracy against people of a certain phenotype?
No culture-race linking and ethno-centric pseudo-scientific supremacy theories.

>True, which is why I completely avoid /pol/ despite having pretty /pol/ tier views.
That's like liking to ERP as a pokemon outside of /vp/ or Bane posting and being a literal pedo outside of /tv/. Cancer is cancer, whether it's a new growth or still part of the colony.

I remember a time when /pol/ was red /int/, with lighthearted banter and giggles, before the stormfucks and newfag wehraboos turned it into Schutzstaffel HQ

>You can't be a right winger without being an autistic /pol/ack redditor

You don't remember shit then, flags on /pol/ are a relatively new thing and /pol/ used to be A LOT more extremist. The more extreme elements moved to 8pol after moot's /pol/ocaust.

Nah Brexit will tear UK apart with Muh freedom of movement and single market

Why don't we just give people the right to freely segregate themselves so all the people who want to can and all the people who don't won't have to be forcibly displaced?

Perhaps because he doesn't want to erase and dispossess various interesting peoples? Perhaps it's because it's extremely distressing for the victimized group?

Lefties get butthurt about colonialism and they talk about the preservation of culture but then you guys do this shit.

>destruction of cultures and peoples is bad
>except if they're European then fuck them.

Not that guy, but I don't think we should want any people erased. And wanting your people to exist is just natural instint.

The "extremist" elements on /pol/ are actually jews and spics LARPing as whites to try to bait some white autists to do something violent to make whites look bad, like the French Canadian faggot on the news right now. It's all psyops.

>double-spacing is REDDIT!
It's just syntax, m'lord.

Pretty much, except that's not being a right winger so much as being part of a literal meme machine spanning Veeky Forums, reddit, and countless other websites with that particular viewpoint. It's the same thing as telling drawfags that color noses red to fuck off back to tumblr, or still using pepe/rage comic memes unironically despite knowing better.

What are you trying to tell me Schlomo?

not an argument

user, do this.
Google "list of countries by ethnic diversity".
Take the list, order it from most diverse to least diverse.
You now basically have a list that goes from extremely shitty countries to good countries.

> Schlomo

Hes trying to tell you to get the fuck back to ya poofter.

>The Celts certainly weren't at peace with each other even in Britain, nor the Greeks.

The Celts didn't have a nation-state.

Again, the argument is that an ethno-nation would reduce (or at least not introduce) conflict of a certain kind. What you're basically saying here is that we shouldn't strive to cure heart disease because lots of people still die from car accidents.

Both the top and the bottom are equal in shittiness. Your point is moot.

Would you dare to say anything of similar nature to a native American? I somehow doubt it.

>why do you care, Tehuapecotl, whether it's your sons and daughters or those of your conquerors that will remain in America? It's just haplogroups, nothing else. Chill, racist.

You know, I usually despise dumb retards posting slogans everywhere but honestly, anti racist is a code word for anti white. It just keeps proving itself true no matter what.

>WHAT IS CORRELATION

That's a shitty attempt at proving your point.

>I can't deny that there is a strong correlation between ethnic homogeneity and not being a shithole therefore I'll just say you're wrong

Never seen this tactic before.

The diverse countries are high on the list because they're colonial shitholes whose borders were drawn up randomly regardless of the cultural or ethnical background. This is what makes them "diverse".

That is not comparable nor relatable to immigration into first world.

Plus Sweden and Norway, the countries with the worst immigrant problems in the EU, are low on that list.

So I guess according to the list immigration is good and being in Africa is bad. But I doubt that's what your point was.

>The diverse countries are high on the list because they're colonial shitholes whose borders were drawn up randomly regardless of the cultural or ethnical background. This is what makes them "diverse".

And why is that bad? Because ethnic diversity on average lowers social trust.

>Plus Sweden and Norway, the countries with the worst immigrant problems in the EU, are low on that list.

First of all, Norway barely has any problems with immigrants, I don't know where you're getting that from. Second point, Sweden problems are very recent, more recent than most of the analysis I'm talking about. And in fact, it's HDI is projected to go down quite a lot in the next years.

>Because ethnic diversity on average lowers social trust.
Yes because Africa was such a great place before colonialism right?

Africa was shit and still is. You can't use that as an argument. What turned Africa especially bad was the abrupt end of colonialism which created a power vacuum. Nothing to do with diversities.

Now lets talk about other countries low on that list:

>Jamaica
>Rwanda
>Honduras
>Libya
>Haiti
>Yemen
>Cambodia
>Egypt
>Albania
>North Korea

Yes, all examples of how mighty one nation states are.

See how shitty your argument was?

Aww, the sjw is triggered : (

You can't just say that putting people of different cultures and ethnicities together randomly is bad and then shift the goalposts when you get called out on it.

>Yes, all examples of how mighty one nation states are.

I see a lot of nations with histories of ethnic violence too.

>You can't just say that putting people of different cultures and ethnicities together randomly is bad
That was never my argument.

I said that it's only what accounts for their "diversity".

They're shit because of the abrupt end of colonialism, as I said...

>I see a lot of nations with histories of ethnic violence too.
Funny, you made a claim with no support.

>Then you'd have to create the *exact* pattern of Japanese history.
No you wouldn't.

All you need to recreate is 99% ethnic homogeneity.

So you're saying there has never been an empire based on martial tradition or warrior culture that hasn't been an ethno-state?

Thats a pretty broad statement.

>Do you have any evidence what you define as "the white race" is facing catastropic population decline?

We aren't suffering so much a "decline" as we are being bred out. The same thing happened to the vikings when they intermingled with more peaceful settlements in northern Europe.

I don't think you know what that word means.

The point of ethnic diversity is to take the strengths from each culture and eliminate their weaknesses, not the other way around.

The left is trying to destroy our martial traditions. That, more than anything, is what we take issue with.

Islamic values are fundamentally different from American ones. We are completely incompatible. Our cultures are too different. As much as I would like us all to live under the same banner, at this point in our history nationalism is still very much necessary in order to promote western progressive ideology. We can't mistake technological and ideological regression for progress.

Though we are not technically "at war" with the various countries Trump is proposing travel bans on, we are very much not "at peace".

It is a very common sense approach to ban immigration from countries we are at war with.

Our news media tends to cover up the fact that we are engaged in small conflicts all around the world. When you are an empire, you are never really "at peace".

You can't really claim we are "at peace" with Iraq, Pakistan, or Iran. But it isn't entirely accurate to say we are "at war" with them either.

>The point of ethnic diversity is to take the strengths from each culture and eliminate their weaknesses
Name one single country that did that and elaborate on how.

>inb4 romans

>In Europe alone the Hapsburg, Romanov, and Ottoman empires were fucking destroyed and replaced by shitty nation states just because everyone (including the "core nation" group) wanted their special snowflake state. For the sake of said special snowflake state.
Whenever big empires start failing, the central powers holding shit together get shown in a bad light and this gives rise to nationalist sentiments which largely probably rely on opportunistic people with their personal interests tied to gaining "independence".

I essentially agree with you on the pointlessness of nationalism as such, but you must realize that it wasn't nationalism that killed the empires. It was the empires rotting to the point where it became easier for the smaller groups just to break off rather than suffer the decline.