Sign into an existing account

No. Let me explain you the difference. Countries like Mexico were conquered by Europeans and from day one there was a clear hierarchy that's present until this day: Aryan Europeans > Spaniards > Natives > Niggers. All the institutions are based around this and it works well because it's the natural order of things. If you are white, people naturally look at you as a person of authority and more knowledgeable. You get the best jobs and the nicest women. Always.

Europe is now being conquered by the Islamic peoples with the help of the Jews, both see the white Christians as inferior to them. Without a smart dictator, muds will try to genocide us all.

But why wouldn't they want to? They have to go back.

It's like you want everyone to understand what a shill you are.

The biggest obstacle for white nationalism is white people who oppose white nationalism, moving to a majority non-white country sidesteps this obstacle, it also removes us from the surveillance state we live in that could very effectively undermine any attempts at organization, the lack of trust is certainly the second largest factor in our inability to accomplish anything politically, third, it removes us from the cultural forces that hamper the acceptance of our ideas, being able to raise your kids in the absence of media influences to the contrary is much more possible outside of the countries in which we currently inhabit.

Ask yourself the question that all good planners do, play out the story in your head along the two paths being considered here, what would happen if we mass migrated to someplace like zimbabwe? I think the results wouldn't be too bad, we'd establish ourselves a community, grow in economic power, use that to leverage power for our people in other areas, and by assisting each other whoever possible we'd take power and influence throughout the country, forcing out the locals and reestablishing rhodesia.

Then we send out our children to other countries to do likewise, anytime any of us is harmed the rest of us will make it the problem of everyone in the non-white population of that country, to the point that none will dare attack us or treat us unfairly due to the fears of retaliation among the whole of their race, knowing all of them will pay the price for whatever any one of them does to any one of us.

We've done it before, with america and other countries, as we are only modifying the approach by adding the tactics we've seen be executed with great effect by the invaders of europe and the blacks of the usa, the Jewish media machine isn't as dominant over there, we'd be the ones spinning the news.

Well also be putting into effort the tactics we learned from the jews, who began from a position of inferiority, like the one we currently inhabit here, and would be even closer to when over there.

Over there we could have our families, we could forge our communities, and you can't come up with a good counterargument against this move, except that it's counterintuitive and that it means accepting the declines of our current lands of residence.

The assumption of us being killed by the black majority of that country once we move there relies upon a cartoonish mischaracterization of white nationalists, and how they see other races as being. It's sneakily insulting to white people that care about their own, and only a kike could come up with it.