Thank you for this video. It was really up to date and also very thoughtful of you to make this video connecting all the relevant topics for the upcoming exam
Hi , wichtige Frage ich muss eine Präsentation halten über einen Bekannten Menschen , Oder Gruppe , aber bezogen auf major minority, betroffen ist . Wenn würdest du mir vorschlagen? Have a nice day!
There are two opposites: the nation state and multiracialism (disguised as multiculturalism). When multiracialism grows, it destroys the nation state, when the native population grows, it destroys multiracialism. The nation state is the default and what is good for the native population, it’s a nation made up of themselves in their own land with their own values, customs, culture and way of life. Multiculturalism would then be bad as that means the destruction of the nation state for the natives of the land and all that is an extension of it. If China suddenly became 30% Indian, I’m sure they would view that as a bad thing. If India suddenly became 30% European, they would likely also view that as a bad thing. But in Europe, a political agenda has been put forth in the order of propaganda that the destruction of the nation states of Europe via multiracialism is a good thing. And sadly, a large portion of Europeans are accepting this evil, surrendering their nation without a single shot fired. Not only do they risk losing their nation state, they risk the racial miscegenation of their people, effectively destroying what makes them Europeans in the first place.
I disagree in many ways. The first and most obvious: there are many multicultural nation states, in what way exactly are they "destroyed"? The second point: you simplify a very complex topic. Assuming that one nation all of a sudden receives an influx that creates a 30% percentage from one ethnic group is highly unusual. In my home country, Germany, there are hundreds of thousands of Syrians who arrived in one of the greatest waves of immigration ever - yet they don't even make up 1 percent of the population. The third point: whether immigration is good or bad depends on your perspective - I personally perceive it as highly positive, and many others in my country do, too. You couldn't run any of the advanced Western countries without immigrants. The fourth point: of course immigration needs to be managed to an extent. It is not either open borders or closed borders, there are many steps in between.
@@MrVEnglischundSport That’s fine, you can disagree. This is not a dictatorship. But let me address your points because I don’t agree with them. Point 1: You said there are many multicultural nation states and how can they be destroyed. But I’m not talking solely about people of the same race with different cultures or languages, I’m talking about states with different races. The nation state is destroyed when it becomes multiracial, but can also become destroyed when it becomes multicultural (but of the same race). It’s just the multicultural nation of the same race can rebound in the new culture and become them without significant genetic change to the host population. Multiracialism does not allow that. An Irish descendant in England is not quite the same thing as a Nigerian descendant in England. Multiculturalism and multiracialism are not the same thing. When significant multiracialism occurs, the host population will be at demographic and threat and thus the nation state would actively be destroying itself more and more as time passes and miscegenation happens. Second point: the destruction of the nation state doesn’t happen overnight or in one wave. It takes decades. A small population can become larger over time and overtake the host population. Miscegenation is certain to happen which destroys the genetic makeup of the host as a hereditary people. For example, the USA was 90% white American in 1950 and in 2050 white Americans will be a minority in the US. In the UK, white British were over 98% of the UK in 1931 but have been professionally predicted to become a minority by 2100. That is the destruction of two nation states, one of a racial nation state while the other an ethnic nation state. Both states being white. You quoted your country of Germany (another white nation) having only 1% Syrian population. However, we can see from professional predictions of German demographics, ethnic Germans are predicted to become a minority in Germany by 2065. That is the destruction of a nation state. Your nation state. Third point: You said whether immigration is bad or good is a matter of perspective and that you couldn’t run any advanced western nation without it. But although you may view immigration as a positive, it’s slowly replacing your people and you have not took notice to it and thus you don’t see the massive negative. What does a future mean for a people replaced in their own nation? And you don’t need immigrants to run an advance modern nation, just ask Japan. Being that your nation has a minority status prediction for your own people, ethnic Germans, it should be enough to snap you out of this slumber you’re in to realize your country won’t be your country in the coming decades unless this path is stopped and reversed. But foolishly you see the replacement of your people in your own land as a positive. Just ask the Native Americans what happens when too many immigrants arrive. The land today that is the US was 100% Native American before Columbus. Today it’s 2%. You do the math and tell me how great immigration is.
Again, I disagree in a number of ways. To keep this short, I want to focus on the most prominent problem I have with your arguments: You presuppose a "true", "pure" nation of one culture and one genetic make-up. This rarely exists, and when it does, I don't see the advantage (yes, Japan is close, but also North Korea). Some of your arguments focus on the US being destroyed because it becomes multiracial and multicultural. Sorry, but this argument does not hold - what is the "true" genetic make-up of the USA - Native American, European, African? The same goes for culture. No doubt that at some point white people in the USA will be a minority - but why is that a problem? The idea of a nation is like the idea of money - it is important because we believe it exists - but it is not an entity that exists in itself. It constantly changes because of that. None of the people who lived in Britain in 1850 are alive today - it cannot be the same nation. Also regarding the USA, don't confuse immigration with conquest. The European settlers weren't a wave of immigrants who applied for visa and sneakily took over the Native Americans' country - they conquered the country! As I said - countries needn't accept unlimited numbers of immigrants - and the certainly needn't accept a foreign power conquering them.
@@MrVEnglischundSport I’ll address your points then. I heavily disagree with them by the way. Nations with “one genetic make-up” and “one culture” as you put it, are not rare but are the norm. As I mentioned look at Japan, China, Vietnam, Thailand, South Korea, North Korea, India, Nigeria, Ghana, Kenya, Tanzania etc basically most places on this planet outside of the American continent and you’ll see one race of people (often with different tribes or clans and maybe different variations of the same genetic group) but with various subcultures of the same type. The USA was like this somewhat as it was 90% white American before it became swamped with massive non-white immigration. I don’t know about you, but 90% is almost an absolute. Out of 1000 Americans, 900 were white. That’s how white the USA was. Yes, there were blacks, native Americans, Latin Americans and East Asians in the US, but their numbers were ridiculously small (blacks made up most of that 10% of the US population that was not white, around 8% of the total so all the other races fit into about 2% total). So now that the US is now only just over half white, that’s a big problem and is a demographic threat to the majority population. Imagine if Japan, China, South or North Korea, Thailand, Vietnam, Nigeria or Ghana became only half of their populations…there would be protests and rioting in the streets and rage in the eyes of the inhabitants of those nations. It would be an absolute demographic catastrophe. So if it’s happening the USA, it should also be a demographic catastrophe and emergency. You say “so what” if the USA’s white population is not the majority and it’s not a problem, but it’s a giant problem and you don’t feel it’s important because either you are not white and don’t understand, are white and just don’t care (that’s real bad) or just not American at all. The USA was spawned by whites. It’s origin is from whites. It grew out of the white civilization in North America. It’s the product of whites. Whites have been its supermajority since it’s founding. It’s absolutely important that whites be it’s majority. Anything other than a majority white USA is not the USA but something else. So I see you mentioned Amerindians. So let’s talk about them. Before the USA, there were various Amerindian tribes (all were the same race by the way, with only tiny differences in their genetic code between regions) with various subcultures of the same family of cultures (like those that exist on continents between peoples of the same race but in different areas of the continent). Well Europeans started arriving in large numbers, pretty much mass immigration. And what was the outcome of that? No more Amerindian lands, the Amerindians become less than 2% of the total population and a new nation is born that replaced the old nations that once stood on that land. Was mass immigration of non-Amerinds good for the Amerindians? Absolutely not. It completely replaced them. It was a demographic catastrophe. Never mind the colonization, because most whites that arrived in North America were colonists not colonizers and were usually farmers, fishermen and merchants…you know, regular people. What is important to look at is the mass immigration. Mass immigration is what replaced the Amerindians. Mass immigration is what is currently replacing the whites now. Mass immigration is not good for any nation and to support the demise of the majority population of a nation is just insane. And no, Britain is not the same nation as in 1850 not because it’s inhabitants are dead, because they absolutely left descendants who are native Brits, but because Britain has experienced mass immigration from Asia, Africa and the Caribbean and because of that it’s transforming Britain into something multiracial that is not Britain and never was Britain. White British are now a minority in London, their own nation’s capital! Mass immigration is destroying Britain. But you see nothing wrong with that because your mindset is twisted and you can’t see that.
Hey Mr.V 😊 One question Brotha, Can you do a Video about Shakespeare and Important Information that Students who are writing a Abitur😅😂. I think that will help a lot of perple including me 😂😂. Thank you for your Time. (P.S You are my favourite englisch Teamcher. ❤🪬📬❤️💚💙❤️🔥🐍)
Thank you for this video. It was really up to date and also very thoughtful of you to make this video connecting all the relevant topics for the upcoming exam
Deine Videos sind so hilfreich und deine Art so angenehm, hab mich auch mit deinen Sport Videos aufs ABI vorbereitet einfach super videos!!! DANKE
Ich liebe deine Videos. Sind super fürs Englisch Abi 👍🏽
Das freut mich sehr!
just used it in class, thank you!
Coming from Wales I see my nationality as Welsh and would not consider myself to be British eventhough I travel the world on a British passport.
Haben Sie in Cambridge studiert ?
Hi , wichtige Frage ich muss eine Präsentation halten über einen Bekannten Menschen , Oder Gruppe , aber bezogen auf major minority, betroffen ist . Wenn würdest du mir vorschlagen?
Have a nice day!
There are two opposites: the nation state and multiracialism (disguised as multiculturalism). When multiracialism grows, it destroys the nation state, when the native population grows, it destroys multiracialism. The nation state is the default and what is good for the native population, it’s a nation made up of themselves in their own land with their own values, customs, culture and way of life. Multiculturalism would then be bad as that means the destruction of the nation state for the natives of the land and all that is an extension of it. If China suddenly became 30% Indian, I’m sure they would view that as a bad thing. If India suddenly became 30% European, they would likely also view that as a bad thing. But in Europe, a political agenda has been put forth in the order of propaganda that the destruction of the nation states of Europe via multiracialism is a good thing. And sadly, a large portion of Europeans are accepting this evil, surrendering their nation without a single shot fired. Not only do they risk losing their nation state, they risk the racial miscegenation of their people, effectively destroying what makes them Europeans in the first place.
I disagree in many ways.
The first and most obvious: there are many multicultural nation states, in what way exactly are they "destroyed"?
The second point: you simplify a very complex topic. Assuming that one nation all of a sudden receives an influx that creates a 30% percentage from one ethnic group is highly unusual. In my home country, Germany, there are hundreds of thousands of Syrians who arrived in one of the greatest waves of immigration ever - yet they don't even make up 1 percent of the population.
The third point: whether immigration is good or bad depends on your perspective - I personally perceive it as highly positive, and many others in my country do, too. You couldn't run any of the advanced Western countries without immigrants.
The fourth point: of course immigration needs to be managed to an extent. It is not either open borders or closed borders, there are many steps in between.
@@MrVEnglischundSport That’s fine, you can disagree. This is not a dictatorship. But let me address your points because I don’t agree with them.
Point 1: You said there are many multicultural nation states and how can they be destroyed. But I’m not talking solely about people of the same race with different cultures or languages, I’m talking about states with different races. The nation state is destroyed when it becomes multiracial, but can also become destroyed when it becomes multicultural (but of the same race). It’s just the multicultural nation of the same race can rebound in the new culture and become them without significant genetic change to the host population. Multiracialism does not allow that. An Irish descendant in England is not quite the same thing as a Nigerian descendant in England. Multiculturalism and multiracialism are not the same thing. When significant multiracialism occurs, the host population will be at demographic and threat and thus the nation state would actively be destroying itself more and more as time passes and miscegenation happens.
Second point: the destruction of the nation state doesn’t happen overnight or in one wave. It takes decades. A small population can become larger over time and overtake the host population. Miscegenation is certain to happen which destroys the genetic makeup of the host as a hereditary people. For example, the USA was 90% white American in 1950 and in 2050 white Americans will be a minority in the US. In the UK, white British were over 98% of the UK in 1931 but have been professionally predicted to become a minority by 2100. That is the destruction of two nation states, one of a racial nation state while the other an ethnic nation state. Both states being white. You quoted your country of Germany (another white nation) having only 1% Syrian population. However, we can see from professional predictions of German demographics, ethnic Germans are predicted to become a minority in Germany by 2065. That is the destruction of a nation state. Your nation state.
Third point: You said whether immigration is bad or good is a matter of perspective and that you couldn’t run any advanced western nation without it. But although you may view immigration as a positive, it’s slowly replacing your people and you have not took notice to it and thus you don’t see the massive negative. What does a future mean for a people replaced in their own nation? And you don’t need immigrants to run an advance modern nation, just ask Japan.
Being that your nation has a minority status prediction for your own people, ethnic Germans, it should be enough to snap you out of this slumber you’re in to realize your country won’t be your country in the coming decades unless this path is stopped and reversed. But foolishly you see the replacement of your people in your own land as a positive. Just ask the Native Americans what happens when too many immigrants arrive. The land today that is the US was 100% Native American before Columbus. Today it’s 2%. You do the math and tell me how great immigration is.
Again, I disagree in a number of ways. To keep this short, I want to focus on the most prominent problem I have with your arguments:
You presuppose a "true", "pure" nation of one culture and one genetic make-up. This rarely exists, and when it does, I don't see the advantage (yes, Japan is close, but also North Korea).
Some of your arguments focus on the US being destroyed because it becomes multiracial and multicultural. Sorry, but this argument does not hold - what is the "true" genetic make-up of the USA - Native American, European, African? The same goes for culture. No doubt that at some point white people in the USA will be a minority - but why is that a problem?
The idea of a nation is like the idea of money - it is important because we believe it exists - but it is not an entity that exists in itself. It constantly changes because of that. None of the people who lived in Britain in 1850 are alive today - it cannot be the same nation.
Also regarding the USA, don't confuse immigration with conquest. The European settlers weren't a wave of immigrants who applied for visa and sneakily took over the Native Americans' country - they conquered the country! As I said - countries needn't accept unlimited numbers of immigrants - and the certainly needn't accept a foreign power conquering them.
@@MrVEnglischundSport I’ll address your points then. I heavily disagree with them by the way.
Nations with “one genetic make-up” and “one culture” as you put it, are not rare but are the norm. As I mentioned look at Japan, China, Vietnam, Thailand, South Korea, North Korea, India, Nigeria, Ghana, Kenya, Tanzania etc basically most places on this planet outside of the American continent and you’ll see one race of people (often with different tribes or clans and maybe different variations of the same genetic group) but with various subcultures of the same type. The USA was like this somewhat as it was 90% white American before it became swamped with massive non-white immigration. I don’t know about you, but 90% is almost an absolute. Out of 1000 Americans, 900 were white. That’s how white the USA was. Yes, there were blacks, native Americans, Latin Americans and East Asians in the US, but their numbers were ridiculously small (blacks made up most of that 10% of the US population that was not white, around 8% of the total so all the other races fit into about 2% total). So now that the US is now only just over half white, that’s a big problem and is a demographic threat to the majority population. Imagine if Japan, China, South or North Korea, Thailand, Vietnam, Nigeria or Ghana became only half of their populations…there would be protests and rioting in the streets and rage in the eyes of the inhabitants of those nations. It would be an absolute demographic catastrophe. So if it’s happening the USA, it should also be a demographic catastrophe and emergency.
You say “so what” if the USA’s white population is not the majority and it’s not a problem, but it’s a giant problem and you don’t feel it’s important because either you are not white and don’t understand, are white and just don’t care (that’s real bad) or just not American at all. The USA was spawned by whites. It’s origin is from whites. It grew out of the white civilization in North America. It’s the product of whites. Whites have been its supermajority since it’s founding. It’s absolutely important that whites be it’s majority. Anything other than a majority white USA is not the USA but something else.
So I see you mentioned Amerindians. So let’s talk about them. Before the USA, there were various Amerindian tribes (all were the same race by the way, with only tiny differences in their genetic code between regions) with various subcultures of the same family of cultures (like those that exist on continents between peoples of the same race but in different areas of the continent). Well Europeans started arriving in large numbers, pretty much mass immigration. And what was the outcome of that? No more Amerindian lands, the Amerindians become less than 2% of the total population and a new nation is born that replaced the old nations that once stood on that land. Was mass immigration of non-Amerinds good for the Amerindians? Absolutely not. It completely replaced them. It was a demographic catastrophe. Never mind the colonization, because most whites that arrived in North America were colonists not colonizers and were usually farmers, fishermen and merchants…you know, regular people. What is important to look at is the mass immigration. Mass immigration is what replaced the Amerindians. Mass immigration is what is currently replacing the whites now. Mass immigration is not good for any nation and to support the demise of the majority population of a nation is just insane.
And no, Britain is not the same nation as in 1850 not because it’s inhabitants are dead, because they absolutely left descendants who are native Brits, but because Britain has experienced mass immigration from Asia, Africa and the Caribbean and because of that it’s transforming Britain into something multiracial that is not Britain and never was Britain. White British are now a minority in London, their own nation’s capital! Mass immigration is destroying Britain. But you see nothing wrong with that because your mindset is twisted and you can’t see that.
@@IslenoGutierrezCould you define Britishness, please?
Hey Mr.V 😊
One question Brotha, Can you do a Video about Shakespeare and Important Information that Students who are writing a Abitur😅😂. I think that will help a lot of perple including me 😂😂. Thank you for your Time.
(P.S You are my favourite englisch Teamcher. ❤🪬📬❤️💚💙❤️🔥🐍)
Hey buddy,🙃
I'll see what I can do