New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
Sign up
You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
WeedleTLiar on scored.co
1 month ago 9 points (+0 / -0 / +9Score on mirror ) 1 child
Diversity was never our strength. Diversity is *expensive* but we were so wealthy and successful that we could afford it. Now, when the situation is loss rosey, we can clearly see the cost.

In the 80%, we only accepted a tiny number of immigrants, and usually the top 1% of the 1% in terms of ambition and conscienciousness and any others (Cuba refugees in Miami, ex-slaves and border hoppers in the south) stood out like sore thumbs. We were able to lull ourselves into the idea that we were great *because* of those people instead of recognizing that we were supporting them the entire time, to our cost.
HimmlerWasRight88 on scored.co
1 month ago 2 points (+0 / -0 / +2Score on mirror )
Yes, but we must not shift the narrative to the economic impact.
The other side can insist that non-whites invaders are good for the economy, and if we prove they aren't, then you get someone like Trump who wants every shitskin on earth to come to America as long as he's economically productive.

The problem with non-whites is not that they are not economically productive. The problem with non-whites is that when they become a majority after reproducing like cockroaches they will simply vote to take all our wealth away and kick us out of our countries. This happened several times during "decolonization". They kicked White people out of, for example, Algeria even if those White people had been there fore several generations and they settled the land.

Non-whites are an existential threat because they will either deport us or put us in camps or just slaughter us all once they have the power to do so.
Toast message