immigration policy?
That is, no one can enter America permanently, unless the following criteria are satisfied:
+ white heritage (Aryan certificate)
+ 18 years old at least
+ good grades in school
+ either a university degree or skilled worker
Alongside a policy of deporting all illegals, ending birthright citizenship, this new "whites only" mass immigration, could turn around American demographics, could it not? Plus, end welfare to people who have more than 2 kids (which will eliminate the problem of many kids black women and many kids Hispanic women).
>>71507547
no because germans and swedes are also classified as "whites"
keep your leftist BS in your own country
Why would you ever ban asians?
>>71507547
Anything to heavily restrict it and only allow the wealthy/talented would be good
>>71507547
How would a racist policy like that every get passed as law?
>end welfare to people who have more than 2 kids
So what would you do to those people who had more than 2 kids and are unable to support themselves? Let them starve?
>>71507699
>Why would you ever ban asians?
Because they are non-white.
>>71507719
>Anything to heavily restrict it and only allow the wealthy/talented would be good
That will not change the current demographic trend in America (white minority in 2030).
>>71507547
Serve White's what? Who or what is a 'White', and why do they serve them only? How can I get a White?
>>71507760
>How would a racist policy like that every get passed as law?
Easy. Just declare "safe" countries which are the only countries from which permanent immigration can originate. If you include the "good grades" and "skills" or "degrees" qualifier, then you essentially eliminate all non-whites.
>>71507760
>So what would you do to those people who had more than 2 kids and are unable to support themselves? Let them starve?
Take away their kids, then let them starve. Yes.
>>71507892
>Just declare "safe" countries which are the only countries from which permanent immigration can originate
That would be hard to get votes from congressmen with districts or states with a sizable immigrant community.
But you'd really support taking children from parents and then letting them starve? What if there is a job shortage in their area or they have a disability?
What if the kids are all 15 and 16 and 17? Would you take them into state custody?
>>71508382
>But you'd really support taking children from parents and then letting them starve?
I support taking care of the kids and not handing any welfare to the parents who have kids without being able to support them. I also support sterliizing these welfare queens.
>What if there is a job shortage in their area or they have a disability?
If there is a job shortage, they should move elsewhere or be self employed.
If they have a disability, they shouldn't have 3+ kids.
>>71508382
>What if the kids are all 15 and 16 and 17? Would you take them into state custody?
No, I think, kids aged 14+ are actually adults. So they would be on their own.
>>71508603
>not handing any welfare to the parents who have kids without being able to support them
What is they had the kids then got layed off from their medium to high paying job?
>I also support sterilizing these welfare queens
Eugenics lost significant popularity in mainstream political discourse after the whole Hitler thing, so this would also probably never be passed by any Western government.
>If they have a disability, they shouldn't have 3+ kids.
What if they had 3+ kids then got a crippling disability?
>kids aged 14+ are actually adults
So, under your plan, the state would take in children from mothers with more than 2 kids, raise them as wards of the state, as release them into the world at 14 to make it on their own?
You should read up on children raised as wards of the state vs by their parents; they generally turn out better if you have your parents
You definitely have unique ideas, I'll give you that even if I don't agree with them. I think they sound good in theory but would not work so well in practice, not to mention the great leaps you'd need to go through to get them approved.
i'm off to sleep, good debating with you bro.
>>71507547
Hahahahahahahaha, I'm absolutely sure the US government would actually let this happen. I have no doubts of any sort, what could could POSSIBLY be mentioned to stop it?
Oh, wait...
>>71507547
I would support this desu.
>>71507892
>Easy. Just declare "safe" countries which are the only countries from which permanent immigration can originate. If you include the "good grades" and "skills" or "degrees" qualifier, then you essentially eliminate all non-whites.
I love it how anti-immigrant activists basically just admit they are racists who are to scared to come out as racists.
>>71507547
It's how the entire western world used to be before kikes ruined it in the 1960s. The will eventually be erased.
>>71511497
I love when kikes are open about the ethnic replacement and genocide of white non-kikes.
>>71511497
I also love how kikes never do as they preach you fucking kike.
>>71511497
And for good measure, another filthy fuck face, unelected kike telling non-kike white people how to rule their lands and using the racism meme to silence criticism, you faggot kike.
>>71507547
Here is how you do it:
CRIMINALITY BASED IMMIGRATION POLICY.
A state has has a high homicide rate? Fuck you, your migration quota is lowered.
You could call it risk-based migration quotas.
>white's only
White's only what?
