Consume Product

Exceptions prove the rule, if they weren't notably out of the ordinary then they wouldn't be exceptions.

Stops pilpul and "but what about the .000000001% that aren't....." bullshit right in it's tracks.

first of all, you cannot have your perception skewed based on exceptions. You cannot base society as a whole on exceptions. You cannot make rules that apply en masse for a minority of minorities.

They got their own country. No longer nomads. A cozy little ethnostate of their own. But they still don't stop exploiting, subverting and destroying other nations. They will never stop because they believe we are their cattle and them the masters, the chosen. You cannot simply educate away such genetic traits and behaviors. They have always been like this

they will never stop unless they are stopped.

You have to qualify if you're talking about a group or individuals.

The argument about jews, blacks, pajeets, etc has never been "every single one of them is bad that's why they must be expelled". The argument is "as a group they are bad". I don't care if Brother Nathaniel is good, I don't care if Jesse Peterson is good, I don't care if... an Indian could be hypothetically good, they can be good around their own people in their own country.

Irrelevant.

14.88. White countries for white people. We don't need a reason.

NAXALT fallacy. Not All X Are Like That

It's a favorite for midwits

It doesn't matter if "its not all jews", Zionism and Communism, and the Gnostic Kabbalism they both derive from, are utterly Satanic and pose an existential threat to world peace and societal order. Those ideas must be attacked at their source until they are exterminated, and any jew promoting them is an enemy to all mankind. "You will know them by their works" is the best means of judging jews. The few good ones cant help but fight against the evil thats taken over their race, while the many evil ones cant help but advance that evil, even at their own detriment.

First, it's helpful to properly define what you're talking about. Read about Aristotle's four causes if you're interested, but it's usually sufficient to provide a teleological definition i.e. defining something based on its purpose, or "end". This is helpful because now you've changed classification from a binary to a spectrum, as in a thing is more of something the better it fulfills its end. This also let's you avoid an endless discussion on essential vs accidental properties. You'll still have to agree on what a thing's purpose is, but most people have never thought of anything teleologically so it's an easier conversation. Now it changes from "I know an x who doesn't do y, therefore y is not an essential property" to "I know an x who doesn't do y, therefore he's a bad x".

For a normie-friendly example, let's say the purpose of a jew is to fulfill the mandates of Judaism. Most normies can't comprehend race so this is a good place to start. Then when someone says "what about Mr Jew, he's charitable and uncircumcised", you can respond with "I agree that Mr Jew is charitable and uncircumcised, but does that make him more or less jewish?". You probably see where this is going: to answer that you get to crack open the talmud and show them the terrible things jews ought to do. Most importantly though, this changes the definition of a thing to one not predicated on examples of a thing, but instead on the "ideal" of the thing. Very Platonic, and as all here will know the ideal of the jew is the devil himself (John 8).

Not all whites built the technology, infrastructure, and society of modern advanced society.

Exception proves the rule

Fine, not all...

Let's just deport / execute all the jews that are pedophiles, racists, etc...

If any are left, then you are right. Not all jews were pedophiles.

If not, then we both win.

Because it *literally* is all jews though. That is a provable scientific fact.

How much ethylene glycol are you willing to drink with your milk? What pros will you gain from adding it to your milk?