Alt-right BTFO! Alt-right on suicide watch!

Sup Forums cant refute this without resorting to memes and attacks.

''Those familiar with the alt-right will recognize one of its favorite talking points: Israel supporters—particularly Jews—are hypocritical if they support immigration into the U.S., since they don’t advocate large-scale non-Jewish immigration into Israel or the Palestinian right of return. (It is invoked, for example, in an unabashedly anti-Semitic primer on “How to Argue with Neocons” on an alt-right blog.) Regardless of what one thinks of immigration to the United States, or of Israeli policies, this is a remarkably bad analogy.

Israel was founded as an ethno-state (though it is worth noting that a quarter of its citizens are not Jewish); the United States of America was not. Israel is surrounded by hostile neighbors; the United States is not. A Palestinian right of return would mean forcing a nation of 8 million to accept as many as 4 to 5 million immigrants, many of whom are hostile to its statehood; proportionately, that would be analogous to an influx of 150 million into the U.S. If such a proposal were on the table, Coulter and Trump certainly wouldn’t be the only ones to oppose it.''

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-determination
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization_Act_of_1790
rt.com/news/341744-eu-refugees-quotas-fines/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

So the only jewish state in the world gets to be the only ethnostate in the world while everyone else succumbs to globalism and immigration. What a "coincidence"

Everyone can easily refute it.

> this is a bad analogy because muh buzz words

Sweet argument. You still did nothing to address the fact that Jewish people constantly pushing for America to accept potentially dangerous people at an alarming rate while denying Israel the same.

That was a well-written strawman though, got to give the author that.

What buzzwords? And why is it a straw man, what has he misrepresented?

I'm less concerned with Jews advocating diversity in the US than them advocating diversity in Europe. Europe should be for Europeans, America was never a white country.

>Israel was founded as an ethno-state (though it is worth noting that a quarter of its citizens are not Jewish); the United States of America was not

Free white males were the only people with rights.

> ethno-state
> dangerous is what I say it is, and it's not Mexico nor is it economic
> 5 million is okay because you are so big

You've still done nothing to address the hypocrisy that Jews insist the US and EU have open borders while theirs remain closed.

Coming from fucking canada? America Canada and Australia are white country's. Just because a few fucks who could not invent the wheel had to be removed first doesn't make them non white country's.

>Israel was founded as an ethno-state

So was Poland and many European states after WWI but if they don't want rapefugees, they are NAZIS!

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-determination

>(((Our Greatest Ally))) was founded as an ethno-state (though it is worth noting that a quarter of its citizens are not Jewish);
No, it wasn't. The state was founded because Jews were displeased at being ruled by Muslims, but it was never an ethno-state.

>(((Our Greatest Ally))) is surrounded by hostile neighbors; the United States is not.
Mexico is hostile. The Muslims are hostile towards the USA. Your point directly supports stopping shitskin immigration into the USA.

>A Palestinian right of return would mean forcing a nation of 8 million to accept as many as 4 to 5 million immigrants, many of whom are hostile to its statehood;
The Alt-RIght hates Muslims as much as Jews; they don't care about a Palestinian right of return. This point is moot.


Boy that sure was easy

>Starting a thread with BTFO in it
>Not baiting

Crashing this thread with no survivors!

They have no shame at all, they even admit it.
What about European countries? These nations were intended as ethno-states which is clearly visible in the names alone.

How are these illegal immigrants not hostile to America with their Mexican flag waving and burning the American flag?

>Israel was founded as an ethno-state (though it is worth noting that a quarter of its citizens are not Jewish); the United States of America was not
Yes, it was. This nation exists for the benefit of the descendants of those who inhabited it at the time of founding.

Mexican cartels are hostile neighbors
So are Mexicans who come in only to steal money and send it home
Letting in(or refusing to, in this case) muslim immigrants from overseas is exactly equivalent to Israel taking the same people over land

And America was implicitly an ethno-state because nonwhites did not have rights and immigration was highly restricted on a nation by nation basis.
>racism is okay when jews do it
Go back to plastering buses with Islamic mottos you subhuman.

>the United States of America was not
Wasn't US explicitly a country for white Christians in the past?

ill roll

"ethno-state"

what a horribly outdated and racist concept.

"hostile neighbors"

that doesn't make any sense, all Israels neighbors are muslim and as we all know islam is a religion of peace.

YOU JUST GOT MEMED SON
ALT RIGHT MEMED

Considering when the US was founded only white landowners had rights i think you are too stupid to learn history and you should kill yourself achmed.

roll
for my sweet elizabeth

>BTFO
>dat strawman

Pick one faggot.

There are two main arguments in your post

>One: Isreal is founded as ethno-state, US was not, therefore immigration into the US is justified

No one disputes this. The argument is that being an ethno-state is superior, and therefore the US should be changed into one. Not that it was founded as one.

>Two: Isreal is surrounded by hostile neighbors, therefore immigration provides a more real threat

Objectively, illegal immigration, and arguably legal immigration, results in a net-loss for the US culturally and economically. It's irrelevant if immigration does more damage in Israel, it still does damage in the US. We also exist in a world completely globalized by technology and economics. It's irrelevant how geographically "close" the problem societies are.

If it isn't in the Constitution, historical precedent doesn't matter if current laws ignore those precedents.

America ceased to be truly American when Anglo-Saxons ceased to be the dominant majority of whites, then disappeared further when Protestants ceased to be the dominant majority of Christians, and now the death will be complete once whites are no longer the dominant majority of Americans. It's an unfortunate cascade effect caused by not holding all three pillars of our WASP heritage sacred.

American immigration was exclusive to white Europeans and non-whites did not have full rights until after WW2 (when the jews took over).

European countries were literally ethnostates by definition (until the jews took over).

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and
>secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and OUR posterity,
do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

This country is for Americans and the children of Americans first and foremost and has been since our foundational documents were written centuries ago. Go back to mosque, Adbul.

I think you are confusing the right to vote, with all rights. And even then it was different from state to state.

>voting is the only right
Voting is not a human right to begin with, let alone the only right.

>the United States of America was not.

But it explicitly was.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization_Act_of_1790

But even if it were true, so what? What matters is if an ethnocentric policy is justified now. Her argument pretty much amounts to "ah, but the Israelis decided from the beginning that they were going to be racist".

oh look.....another british muslim donkey fucker whining about Israel

There are many Jews, such as myself, that are TOTALLY against immigration from illegals and muslims

didn't the founding fathers only consider free white men as citizens? and they only considered anglos white? sounds like an ethnostate to me.

Are you leaving EU soon or do you pay our Jizja, Austerlitz pleb?

rt.com/news/341744-eu-refugees-quotas-fines/

>Israel was founded as an ethno-state (though it is worth noting that a quarter of its citizens are not Jewish); the United States of America was not
wasn't the usa founded as a christian country? meaning that anti-christian sentiment in the usa is hostile and that us citizens who want to live in a christian country should be able to build a wall and blow up those hostiles?

>A Palestinian right of return would mean forcing a nation of 8 million to accept as many as 4 to 5 million immigrants, many of whom are hostile to its statehood; proportionately, that would be analogous to an influx of 150 million into the U.S
sounds awfully similar to the whole refugee thing in germany, which is apparently fine and you are a racist if you disagree.