Did the the race talk debate start happenning more often since we know how many white ethno staters we have?

[K@th]

Again, you need 75% of Congress and then 75% of the states to pass an amendment. It's. Not. Going. To. Happen.

Deal with it. This country will not have policy about whites being the thing. IT's not going to happen.

If you want to live in a mostly white state, here are some options that already have 90% white population:

Maine
Vermont
New Hampshire
West Virginia
Iowa
Wyoming
Idaho
Montana
Kentucky
North Dakota

[StCapps]

Again, you need 75% of Congress and then 75% of the states to pass an amendment. It's. Not. Going. To. Happen.

Deal with it. This country will not have policy about whites being the thing. IT's not going to happen.

If you want to live in a mostly white state, here are some options that already have 90% white population:

Maine
Vermont
New Hampshire
West Virginia
Iowa
Wyoming
Idaho
Montana
Kentucky
North Dakota

A constitutional amendment happened in 1992, 1971, 1967, 1964, 1961, 1951, 1933 (twice), 1920, 1919, 1917, 1913 (twice), 1870, 1868, 1865, 1804 and 1795. The average is one constitutional amendment every 12.5 years since you ratified the constitution, 226 years ago, you're due.

Why can't it happen again?

[K@th]

Because nobody is really worried about it, except a few SIFCLIFs.

[StCapps]

Because nobody is really worried about it, except a few SIFCLIFs.

And if that changes? Constitutional amendments are not as rare as you seem to think, and SIFCLF's aren't need to think a Notwithstanding Clause is a good idea, they might just be after some constitutional flexibility, and way to better ensure states rights than the 10th amendment.

[K@th]

Because nobody is really worried about it, except a few SIFCLIFs.

And if that changes? Constitutional amendments are not as rare as you seem to think.

Get back to me when it does. Again, though, I seriously doubt asking the brown and black people to leave voluntarily will have much of an impact.

[StCapps]

Again, though, I seriously doubt asking the brown and black people to leave voluntarily will have much of an impact.

Why do you assume a hypothetical White Ethno State in America would do that?
Why do you always assume the worst about White Ethno States in America?
Why can't you envision a more benign form of White Ethno State in America?


Who is really being the SIFCLFs here? Who only sees the negative when they hear the term White Ethno State in America?

[K@th]

Why do you always assume the worst about White Ethno States in general?

Whites will be the minority at some point, soon. The birth rate problem will ensure that whites will continue to decline in percentage wrt demographic makeup. If we decide constitutionally, that we want a white majority, then we will have to get rid of those who made whites the minority.

Even if we decide today that we want a white majority maintained, you'll still have to fix the replacement birth rate problem, because that isn't going away.

I've explained this over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over .

[StCapps]

Whites will be the minority at some point, soon. The birth rate problem will ensure that whites will continue to decline in percentage wrt demographic makeup. If we decide constitutionally, that we want a white majority, then we will have to get rid of those who made whites the minority.

That's why going the Notwithstanding Clause route is easier. You don't need all of America to become the ethnostate, just a portion of it, if they voluntarily agree to it. It easy to maintain a white majority in states that are already predominantly white with the Notwithstanding Clause to opt out of the immigration policies that would displace them as the majority. If the Supreme Court tries to tell them otherwise, they play the Notwithstanding Clause.

Even if we decide today that we want a white majority maintained, you'll still have to fix the replacement birth rate problem, because that isn't going away.

I've explained this over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over .

And? I've said that too. You act like I don't already know that, but I beat you to that punch when it came to making that argument in these ethno state threads. You just want to act like I've made some outrageous argument that I never made instead, it's ridiculous.

[K@th]

You don't need all of America to become the ethnostate, just a portion of it, if they voluntarily agree to it.

I just listed 10 states that are 90% white. It already exists. DSL is arguing for the entire country. Never. Going. To. Happen.

[StCapps]

You don't need all of America to become the ethnostate, just a portion of it, if they voluntarily agree to it.

I just listed 10 states that are 90% white. It already exists. DSL is arguing for the entire country. Never. Going. To. Happen.

But they aren't ethno states, they are just predominantly white. A notwithstanding clause can help those states preserve the white majority, by giving them the option of opting out of the federal immigration laws, and it would also allow them to become an ethnostate if they so choose, without constitutional restraint if the people will vote for such an agenda. The Notwithstanding Clause allows for constitutional flexibility in many matters, not just regarding ethnostates.