This page briefly clarifies the threat to the United States from continuing to 'dominate' indigenous American cultures, and tries to help skeptical people understand why it would be better for the United States to cede territory voluntarily.
This website is opposed to 'globalization', and supports tribal survival, whether the tribe is Native American, European or whatever.
In WW2 Japan attacked the U.S. There are a lot of historical reasons for the attack, but underlying it all was a strategic racial basis that many people are not aware of. The United States, Europeans, a race distant from Japanese, had conquered indigenous Americans, a race closer to Japanese.
For all the local reasons for the war, that was the underlying strategic motivation. Unspoken, but basic as a motive.
The Japanese fought Asian powers too, and the U.S. fought Europeans, but at the basic strategic level, the Japanese motive was most powerful.
When China deals with the U.S., they have, in recent decades, dealt with the U.S. as a power greater than them. In other words they tread a little more softly than the Japanese did in WW2. Now, though, another bloc, here called 'China', is soon to be powerful enough that racial factors will be part of their strategic calculus.
They are well aware of the history of the United States, and they will deal with the U.S. as 'a Eurocentric power that conquered a far east power'. In other words an opposing force that conquered 'their future', the race that was a little ahead of them.
Worse, they are using, and will use, the ethics that the U.S. has legitimized in the last century. It is similar to Germany using the predatory behavior of its opponents post WW1, disguised in other motives, but at its root simple racial predation.
The important calculation at this point is whether they have the means to improve their position relative to the United States to an extent that would dramatically change the status of the United States.
The answer is that not only do they have the power, but that the dramatic shift is already underway. The U.S. is like the proverbial frog in a pot of water that is slowly being heated.
There is no alternative for the United States, at this point, other than to cede real sovereignty of significant territory.to racially indigenous groups, giving the Chinese a racial ally in the new world i.e., the Americas.
A hundred, or even 50 years ago there might have been other alternatives.
There aren't now.
It's unlikely, for political reasons, that the U.S. will react properly, so this page is just a suggestion, a warning. History will fill in the blank spaces.
This website tries to provide a constructive alternative to the globalist decay that is directly in front of the United States and other countries, decay which ultimately will end in tribal boundaries.
Q Wasn't North America an unpopulated wilderness when Europeans arrived? Weren't the indigenous people primitive savages who needed masters?
A Indigenous people in any location that is isolated will develop technology that is incomprehensible to other groups. With regard to short term colonization, e.g. in the Americas, the only technology that matters is weaponry. A primitive group with effective weapons can colonize an advanced group which does not have such developed weapons.
Q But the indigenous peoples of the Americas were engaging in wars with each other 400 years ago. Doesn't that prove they were primitive?
A Europeans also were using military skills against other Europeans 400 years ago, in fact there are still military conflicts in Europe today.
Q A lot of people of European descent have been born in the Americas. Doesn't that make them indigenous, or part of the indigenous population?
A If a person owns a house for 50 years, you cannot spend a night there and then claim ownership. The most basic common senses differentiates between an indigenous race and foreign races. The ploy of trying to stealth colonize a region by hijacking indigeneity, aside from showing intellectual dishonesty, is a globalist ploy used by fake tribalist melting potters. In this case usually a distortion of European nationalism by globalists pretending to be white nationalists. No honest person with integrity claims that Europeans are indigenous to the Americas.
Q But weren't there Arctic peoples from both east and west who traveled to the Americas before other Scandinavians and Europeans?
A Yes, and they are part of the non European indigenous population. Dishonest European colonizers cannot claim rights to the Americas on the basis of another group's actual rights. It would be like Italy claiming Quebec because some French people were early recent travelers there, on the basis that France and Italy are close. It's simple clever globalism hiding behind ambition.
Q But isn't globalism important? Aren't all humans one happy family, and shouldn't we all live wherever we can, without respect for tribal boundaries?
A It's important to recognize that other groups may have access to information, knowledge etc that one's own group does not have. Mixing all races into one large melting pot, or group of melting pots, destroys the development of that.
Q But a lot of people are mixed race etc. Aren't those people indigenous to both sides, therefore creating indigenousness for their relatives?
A The concept of federalism has as its natural origin those people who exist between two races. In all cultures around the world, mixed race people between two cultures are the 'growing tip' of a separate group, with several complex functions. Federalism that developed as a political tool was derived from this natural group. Mixed race people are 'actual federal powers' in a society, but not indigenous to a specific part of their composite societies, except as accepted by any of those societies. There is no 'contagious indigenousness' from those people to their relatives
Q But if mixed race people are the natural federal powers of a society, don't they have the right to confer indigenousness?
A The perversion of the notion of 'federal' is similar to the use of tribal interests by 'European nationalists' trying to take indigenous American territorial rights. In most regions today, including North America, 'federal' has become a meaningless word used by whoever has the most power, and has no real connection to the actual concept of federal power and federating influences. In English the word 'federal' signifies dishonest intent, rather than referring to any genuine federal power. Some people created jobs for themselves, hired their friends, formed a gang, then hid behind the word federal. The natural progression of genuine federal development has no relationship to 'federal' assclowns who stumble around under words like 'federal' that they pay themselves and their allies to use.
Q Wouldn't the United States disappear though if it started to give land back to indigenous people?
A The United States is starting to disappear because it has not done that. The next step is a fracturing of the country. Then survival of those parts that have the strongest base and allies. The TLDR version is that the United tates is heading into very unpleasant decay unless it consolidates wisely, which means ceding fully sovereign territory to indigenous interests.