>>516049454
Yes.
Look at it this way. What does the world really lose if niggers are genocided? Just some entertainers. Sportsball gets a little slower and less violent, more white and shitskin rappers have to step up instead (hopefully rap dies though), no more Morgan Freeman playing the wise old black man in a movie. Big deal. Nothing of value was lost.
On the other hand, let's look at what is gained. Just a few things off the top of my head - violent crime rates drop to almost nothing (except for spics), trillions of dollars are freed up from social welfare safety nets and affirmative action/DEI jobs to more productive uses, educational standards skyrocket overnight, walkable cities become a possibility, and we can all leave our bikes unlocked again. Meanwhile, there isn't a single dent in anything scientific or technologically advanced or good with the world.
Anyone who's being honest acknowledges that niggers are a net loss, it's not even debatable at this point. The only legitimate argument would be to have us hang in there awhile longer, for some kind of gene-editing where we could target the hundreds of alleles that make them such losers, and potentially turn them human in a few generations. But I still think genocide (or at a minimum forcible repatriation and permanent segregation) is a much more direct and efficient solution, and we know it will have a good outcome as opposed to only a theoretically good outcome.
Eradicating the North American pavement ape is a huge win, no matter how you slice it.