Whether it is 50 years from now or 250, where is the difference? The first genetically modified baby was already born in China. Sure, only one gene was changed, but the first computer also could only do some basic calculations.

I'm not convinced that it'll ever happen. A genetically modified baby doesn't imply that we'll figure something out this complicated, especially with structural issues that pose an existential threat to all the most scientifically productive nations in the world.

I doubt this. If some guy is born to black parents (but got modified to he genetically white) in Congo and lives there for 25 years until he decides to go to the US, will this guy just behave like the Americans? Sure, his chances to assimilate are higher, than if he was genetically black, but higher chances is not the same as guaranteed.

If his genes are white, then he'd be like any white immigrant from Africa. I've never met a white immigrant from the Congo, but I've met Afrikaners and I have no problems with them coming in.

Even if everyone would assimilate, do you really want to have a country, where 90% of all people are foreigners, that just happen to share most of their genes with you?

What you're describing is what we've have in a pan-European ethnostate. It's also what my experience would be if I moved to a foreign white nation like Norway or Hungary, both of which would be phenomenal if they were options for me. I see no issue here.

Here in my homeland many people ask me, whether I have a Swedish background, because I look like the Golden One (with fewer muscles). If I moved to Sweden, I would still always be a foreigner. Not only does my name identify me as a foreigner, but everyone also knew that I am from a different country. Especially I myself knew, that I am not from Sweden and hence can never become a "full Swede".

They'd act a bit different, but I wouldn't have a problem with it. I dated a fresh off the boat Ukrainian immigrant in undergrad and while her mannerisms were a little bit different, she was still just a good white girl. Her thick accent and modesty didn't really pose issues and I didn't feel like the gap was as wide as if I'd gone to date an American-born Asian or African girl.

Where is the difference to civic nationalism? Everyone can become a national by sharing our ideas and values in the civnat worldview. You want him to share your genes, but the basic idea is still that everyone can become part of our nation (if he fits some criteria, that is not connected to ancestry). I believe a nation is an organism, that has grown over centuries and even millennia.

The problem with civic nationalism is not that people could join. It's (a) that similarity of ideology, values, and personality is alienating to people like us who do not accept 21st century American cultural norms and (b) that since we have no practical way of testing for similarity of ideology, values, and personality, we wind up with vastly different and diverse sets of people who hate us. In a science-fiction society where we had some brainscan that could tell us if someone was sufficiently similar in their ideology, values, and personality and would remain that way, then civic nationalism would be functionally identical to genetic nationalism.

I personally know some Germans living in Canada, that came there in the late 1940s. They do not claim to have won the war. No, they will talk about the horrible crimes by soviet solders. Sure, there might be some. But once again, some are not all. I personally doubt, that anyone honestly believes to have won the war, even though he was a German, but ok maybe there are some.

I think you're just lying tbh. Even Germans in Germany don't talk this way. Germans in Germany will talk about losing the war, but they will not be anti-Russian about it. They'll speak thankfully about the allies who beat them.