Okay, you want a white ethnostate. That's all well and good. But the working class is the majority of the population by far, and if their lives aren't improved by the constitution of your new country, then why should they even support its constitution?
I am asking sincerely. What would your envisioned white ethnostate offer to its white workers, who are like 80% of the population, that would be preferable to what workers have now?

Ethnostate means the ruling class cares about the welfare of their ethnic brothers in the lower classes

>>509696379 (OP)
clean safe community oriented neighborhoods with reliable accessible social services

>>509696379 (OP)
Not having niggers around committing 56% of the murders would be an improvement on everyone's lives, you fucking retard. Getting rid of niggers would solve a lot of problems.

It would be China

>>509696379 (OP)
Working people are the ones most exposed to foreigners

>>509696484
If you allow the rich to import foreigners on the presumption that it will lift the lower classes you will quickly find the lower classes being replaced by ambitious foreigners and your ethnostate is fractured, unless you put laws in place to limit the advancement of foreigners, which is blatant discrimination which will be protested by both foreigners and the lower classes who will associate with their fellow oppressed and disenfranchised people.
An ethnostate must remain pure if it wishes to remain an ethnostate, it must have its upper and lower classes, its middle class, and the lower class is sadly as bad off as the third worlders you would like to exploit to enhance your profits.

>>509696484


If you believe the wealthy will give up their money just because the population looks like them you’ll be the first new white nigger in the labor camp

>>509697029
This.
The wealthy always betray you. They are the true rootless cosmopolitans of the world, jews are their accessories and their willing allies, but they are essentially indistinguishable from one another as far as morals are concerned.

>>509696379 (OP)

>To win labor for his cause, Hitler endeavored to make the destructive nature of Marxism apparent to German working men and women. National Socialism described it as a perverse by-product of the Industrial Revolution. It owed its success to the neglect of the working class by the imperial government in the 19th Century, liberalism’s creation of social barriers within Germany’s national community, and labor’s abrupt loss of roots. The former farmer or artisan, accustomed to creative, useful work with his hands and bound to the soil, was suddenly displaced and operating unfamiliar factory machinery in drab urban environs. A handbook published for German armaments workers summarized labor’s alienation as follows: “The person hatefully regards the machine he feels chained to. It is not his friend and helper. It only drives him in a pointless race for the avaricious interests of individual capitalist employers. It represents unemployment and starvation for many of his fellow workers. The machine distances the person more and more from nature.

>According to the 1938 book Der Bolschewismus (Bolshevism), “such social conditions facing the German worker were the product of liberalism. Like the Renaissance, it glorified the freedom of action and development of the individual, which means the same thing as unscrupulously advancing one’s personal interests.In his 1935 work Odal, Dr. Johannes von Leers added, “Liberalism’s preaching about the unconditional rights of the economically more powerful is so blinding, that de facto economic slavery is considered progress.

>>509697029
>If you believe the wealthy will give up their money just because the population looks like them you’ll be the first new white nigger in the labor camp
Look at feudal Japan or China in the past. Both are extremely homogeneous and had huge populations of ethnic kinsmen barely surviving.
And both had tons of internal wars over which regional lord gets to be the emperor or shogun. Racial and ethnic homogeneity provides no protection at all against civil wars and against predation on the poor by the wealthy.

>>509697456

Society’s failure to nurture and accept the working class as equal divided Germany, contributing to Marxist-organized strikes and mutinies that sabotaged the war effort in 1918. This circumstance supported Hitler’s contention that various groups within a nation, while maintaining their individual character and function, must work together as a mutually supportive entity for common goals, impartially regulated by the state. To disregard one group was to jeopardize all. Entering politics in 1920, Hitler had to combat the substantial Marxist trend among the workers. At this time, many social and economic strata in Germany formed parties championing their individual interests. This was especially dangerous in labor’s case, since it allied itself with Communism, an international revolutionary movement employing subversion, terror and armed insurrection to advance its objectives.

Hitler’s ponderously-named National Socialist German Labor Party (NSDAP) departed from political convention of the period by standing for all Germans. Though he privately disparaged intellectuals, the aristocracy and even the middle class. Hitler recruited from every walk of life. Above the interests of group or individual, he set those of Germany. This was the common denominator that welded his diverse membership into a formidable and aggressive political bloc. He stated in 1928 that National Socialism “is not a movement of a particular class or occupation, but in the truest sense a German people’s party. It will comprise every stratum of the nation, thereby incorporating all vocational groups. It wants to approach every German who wishes only to serve his people, live with his people, and belongs to them by blood.

>>509697624
Germany’s Marxist parties, the Social Democrats and the Communists, did not campaign for labor’s acceptance into the German community but to overthrow the existing social order and supplant it with an international “dictatorship of the proletariat.” They did not solicit followers from among the educated classes. The NSDAP program described the Marxists as “united by feelings of hatred and envy, not by any constructive purpose, against the other half of the nation. Karl Ganzer wrote in Der Schulungsbrief, “Marx did not come from the labor movement but from the liberal sphere. ... He incorporated the concept of a perpetual struggle within society.... Earlier German labor leaders had wanted to solve the social problem through assimilation. With his class warfare ideas, Marx wanted to settle it by bringing chaos to the community."

>>509697810
A fundamental principle of liberalism and Marxism is the belief in universal equality of mankind. It challenged the bastion of absolutism, which had held that a superior privileged class was ordained to rule. It established a moral and legal foundation for individual freedom and parliament. The dictum of America’s Declaration of Independence, that “all men are created equal,” underscored a political demand for representative government. The French Revolution interpreted universal equality in a biological sense as well. It maintained that “all who bear the human countenance” possess comparable natural ability regardless of physical dissimilitude, gender or historic performance.

Scientists and historians disputed this view long before Hitler’s time. The 19th Century English naturalist, Charles Darwin, theorized natural selection and evolution based on the study of animals and fossils. He concluded that species develop unequally, and that nature strives for improvement by favoring reproduction of those exhibiting superior traits and eliminating the unfit. Francis Galton researched the human personality, deducing that intellectual prowess and morality are inherited from parents. He advocated marriages among talented people, believing superior offspring important to advance civilizati

>>509696484
FPBP OP is a faggot

>>509697922
The French aristocrats Arthur de Gobineau and Georges Vacher questioned universal equality from a historical perspective. Gobineau identified a correlation between the growth and vitality of cultures and the races that founded them. Both men argued that ancient civilizations like Persia and India gradually crumbled as the original white populations intermarried with captive or neighboring non-white tribes.

The National Socialists viewed Marxism as the political descendant of revolutionary France. It leveled humanity off to a “faceless mass” by destroying society’s more talented, productive elements.^According to Der Schulungsbrief, “Marxism is a radicalized variant of liberalism strongly rooted in the brutality of the French Revolution."^The journal Volk und Reich (Nation and Realm) wrote, “The Bolshevik revolution regards itself as the legitimate successor to the French."’*

Brutality was indeed an element common to both France’s Reign of Terror and Bolshevik Russia. The first Soviet dictator, Nicolai Lenin, became the only member of the original Politburo, the governing council, to die a natural death. Stalin proclaimed a “war on terror” in December 1934, personally writing a new law imposing a death sentence for “acts of terrorism” and leading to massive executions for several years. In 1937, the Soviet state carried out 353,074 death sentences, the following year 328,618.^^^ Houston Steward Chamberlain described Russia’s Bolshevik regime as under “the influence of the French revolutionary ideal, which in the course of a century, turned decent people into half-beasts filled with envy and loathing."^

>>509698181
Goebbels described the rise of the NSDAP as “one continuous confrontation with the problem of Marxism." The ideologies were at loggerheads regarding questions of the significance of race. The German study Der bolschewistische Weltbetrug [The Bolshevik World Swindle) provides this comparison: “The National Socialist world view interprets the nation racially, as a national community grounded in common historical blood ties of its people as determined by fate. The primary conviction of Marxist ideology is the class concept defining those with possessions and those who possess nothing. This class concept is bound neither by nationality nor by race. It stands like a dividing wall between people of the same nation. At the same time, it joins as brothers persons of the most diverse racial types, ’society is dividing into two immense, diametrical, hostile camps, bourgeois and proletariat,' declared the Communist Manifesto.... Adolf Hitler’s judgment runs a different course. It desires the unity of naturally related people, the removal of class distinctions, and the personal feeling within every individual of belonging to the national community that the person, through fate, was born into."^^^

A primary liberal argument against the significance of race is environmentalism. Supported by democracy and Marxism alike, this theory holds that not racial ancestry, but factors such as climate, arable land, education, luck, and social opportunities determine group or individual achievement. As Der Schulungsbrief explained it, “Marxism is built on the teaching that all men are equal at birth. Differences that become apparent in the course of a lifetime are the result of external influences. Personal development therefore depends on surroundings."

>>509696379 (OP)
>What would your envisioned white ethnostate offer to its white workers, who are like 80% of the population, that would be preferable to what workers have now?
Look at the Nazi platform. Mortgage forgiveness after producing children, strong marriages, stay at home moms, strong welfare programs, guaranteed employment, generous vacation time (on par with modern EU socialist programs), and strong state checks against corporate/banking power. Hell, they even gave mothers medals for being good mothers. Most important was the organizing principle, "for the common good." Which might seem like a platitude but you only have to look at modern America to see how our organizing principle of "individual success" ripples out into every aspect of society and practical policy. We have an H-1B problem because that is what we say this nation is about. Ambitious people will succeed at whatever game you tell them to play, so make sure you pick a good one.

And that was a fairly recent explicitly racist government that was very successful by objective measures. If anything, Nazi Germany was probably the best example so far of a successful worker's revolt. The delusion of Marx was that the working class would take on his leftist economic policies and therefore also take on his leftist social policies. But in reality the working class is always conservative in their culture; economically liberal, but socially conservative, the forbidden combo. It's only the upper class that ever has the luxury of socially leftist views. So Nazi Germany is exactly what a real worker's revolt would look like, a state that secures the middle/lower class against upper class exploitation while simultaneously reinforcing traditional cultural norms.

>>509698406
Application of environmentalism’s principles as a matter of state policy, according to Gross, demonstrates how impractical the theory is: “The habitual criminal, the cold-blooded murderer who since boyhood went through life harboring asocial instincts detrimental to society, was just a 'victim of his surroundings.' The ruthless eradication of those manifesting such bestial, menacing natures is not the obvious solution, but attentive, painstaking education, and improvement through transfer to a 'better environment'; the prison with radios, billiards, and a library. Here the killer experiences a more comfortable lifestyle than the hard-working laborer in the land. This is the logical consequence of the belief that exterior influences decide or can alter the nature of a person."’*

The periodical NS Briefe related the German position: “No amount of education can change the inner substance of a person, since the factors that determine who he is do not come from without. They rest within him, given to him by his parents and grandparents"^^^ Germanisches Leitheft summarized that race alone “makes the individual and indeed the whole society masters of their environment and external circumstances, to shape them according to their will."

>>509696379 (OP)
It's literally the opposite question you should be asking. The ethnostate is for the common man, it's elites who need to be convinced.

>>509696379 (OP)
The concept of "working class" will soon be outdated. Keep in mind that we're living the AI and Robotics revolution, and society as a whole must adapt.

I believe the socialist agenda is being so viciously pushed by the Elites because they know that in the near future, humans will be worthless and machines will do all the work. So the State will have to feed the useless meatbags.

Humans however, are crafty bastards, and in a free society (if any manages to survive) people will find value in new things, especially if they are among their kin. Real value will be on fertile land, like in the good old days (because that's where food comes from), provided the masters of the world don't seize it from us the peasantry.

So a future ethnostate would ideally be composed of rural communities with automated work, a kind of neo-feudalism, doing the opposite of the industrial revolution by bringing people back to the countryside.

>>509699163
No a future ethnostate will ideally be composed of White Europeans with all the low IQ aging and psychopathy genes removed. It will not involve being beholding to psychopathic ""masters"" of the world who earned their status through wall street derivatives.

>>509699562
Europe in the Middle Ages says hello