Overflooding of the non-Whites from their lands definitely generates a need to move out. It's true for them like it is for us. A reduction of population is wanted no matter what. It's just a pity that the Jews are in charge now and largely focus on eradicating Whites to this effect.
>If this was true, then non-Whites would not migrate to Western countries. Even chinks, want come into White countries to exploit and live along side Whites.
Debunked by the fact that we only get a percentage of them and because they are crowded in China.
>And they're retarded, because in their own countries they also show signs of be degenerated and mentally deranged
Which for the large part appeared as our own (((Westernized))) model touched upon their minds as our boats arrived into their ports.
> I also don't think you even try to speak for non-Whites unless you want to admit you're a non-White yourself who supports a cosmopolitan form of fascism.
Ethno-pluralism does not equal cosmopolitanism. I would perfectly understand if, say, Korea was off-limits to non-Koreans.
>And it's retarded and unrealistic it's not gonna happen whatsoever. You're preaching pure fantasy and probably one of those nazbol or duginists faggots.
The global apartheid is the very least we should apply.
>National Socialism or even Mussolini's fascism were not supportive of ethno-pluarism, they believed that their own kind/people should be rule over others.
That is patently false. They never had plans to rule over other people. NatSoc merely aimed at making more room for Germanic groups, while Fascism was more messy but certainly blended with a more classical form of nationalism which is natural to any people on this planet.
>Ethnopluralism shouldn't be a core principle though. The bottom line is ultimately I only want Whites to survive, and I only want Whites on top of the pyramid.
That's perfectly fine coming from a White person. The racial altruism is largely poisonous. But being on top implies having something beneath.
>Fascism is opposed to such rigid dogmas in the first place.
Fascism is rather rigid by nature, so what's about that flexible dogma you seem to imply?