Most people refuse to see the racial aspects of these movements (at least insofar as they relate to White people) because to do so feels icky and their friends will call them nazis and they don't want that. If corporations are simply greedy, that's the kind of problem you can argue with your friends about. If corporations hate White people, or particularly White culture or history, then you're going to be a pariah among many of your friends if you talk about it, in many circles. So, lo' and behold, people look very closely and discover that it has nothing to do with race at all. (Or if it does, the real victims are whoever is not White.) No matter how explicitly people attack or promote policies and cultures against White people and particularly White culture and history.

It's not that I think race itself has no importance to this grand conspiracy, it's my belief that race is not necessary to pull it off. I know the Alt-Right likes to give special attention to White people but history has always been more complex than what just one group of people did or existed during a certain time period. Great examples of this already exist. China today is a far different society than it was 100 years ago. Same with Japan, or Brazil or many African countries. The focus on genetic determinism as the above all reason to explain how the world works has never been consistent given there are so many variables at play or that the environment is always changing.

The only thing that hasn't changed all this time is human greed and the desire for infinite power. And funny enough, the element of greed is a better predictor of who gets to usurp power while at the same time, also losing it. If it was genes only, Britain would still have their colonial empire. Or Japan would have controlled all of Asia in WW2. But nope, they've all fallen. Their race didn't give them magic super powers to not be a detriment to themselves.

And very docile domesticated animals sometimes bite people. But to deny there's been progress made in intentionally making more gentle, harmless dogs (once known as wolves) is simply wrong.

I don't think the comparison to dogs work. How do you breed out "free will" from a Man? And which race has those perfect combination of genes that ensures the future populations wont rise up or rebel? A domesticated human that never questions things might as well be considered a completely new species. And honestly, that would require every human being on earth to undergo such transformation because a lot of people would notice quickly if one race of people worked themselves to death without question.

There already is, expanded to include corporate action, which is no joke. Unless you're extremely docile. They don't really bother deplatforming White people who are completely inoffensive and in fact are afraid of talking frankly about anti-White hate, typically, unless they offend another great cultural taboo like criticize gays.

Apartheid/Jim Crow literally uprooted people from their homes and forced them to live somewhere else. While there is hatred against White people by the media, they are not exactly facing forced government obstacles to make their lives inferior. Just look at wages/standards of living for example. They are still considered the most affluent group in the U.S, only second to Asians/Jews. Justin Trudeau or Biden, if they really hated Whites, should be forcing them all into immediate poverty with no hope of climbing out of it.

No, I didn't say they're 'their own worst enemy'. I'm saying that they're malicious and dishonest. They're not seeking Utopia and, gosh darnit, just don't understand the harm they do. They pay lip service to the idea of 'justice' and mostly it's a way to lash out and punish people.

We have to agree to disagree. Leftists probably view you the same way where they believe anyone on the right is completely unredeemable or they don't make positive contributions. My view of Leftists is there are a lot of bullshitters (like with every political group), but they can still be correct once in a while.

Putting aside how rotten half of those things are - civil rights as the modern left understands it are absurd - those weren't creations of liberals, except insofar as people look at history and go 'Oh I like that. Liberals did that.' A bit like how WWII is now, for idiots, 'Antifa versus DA FASH' and ignoring how the Allies were composed of literal unrepentant colonizers and guys who were adamantly opposed to racial integration, among other things.

I understand where you're coming from. I guess a better analogy is progressivism vs conservatism. Ending slavery or giving women equal rights were definitely ideas resisted by the other side who preferred society stay traditional. Insofar, I don't these ideas were rotten since it made a lot of people happier and freed them from what was a life of eternal punishment.

"Other than the massive amount of racially charged riots we had during the summer, we get along just swell, fellas!" Or better yet, "Toronto has a high population of non-White people (Asians) and they don't have a lot of violent crime, so I don't understand why you can't have a similar culture in Detroit."

Both sides can make an infinite amount of comparisons in terms of which is safer. As proof, I did come across a reddit thread recently that compared homicide rate to the U.S. While plenty of EU countries are safer than some U.S states, homogenous nations like Lithuania or Estonia were more dangerous than multicultural states like California and New York. https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/lg0xt9/homicide_rates_in_us_vs_eu/ However, I know the Alt-Right will rejoice at this information as proof that an all white country is more likely to be safe. But keep in mind, there's also proof that Whiteness in itself doesn't guarantee society can't be extremely violent either.

No one respects centrists, and no one will for a long time, because everyone has figured out that a key component of 'centrism' isn't a firm commitment to a belief (they'd be "extreme" then) but meekness and opportunism. Their ideology changes based on what's in vogue at the moment, and they reposition in reaction to both changing power structures (no matter how rapid or unjust) or outright threats. It's why the left was able to roll over most institutions. Because centrism/being moderate is the norm among people, and those are precisely the people who always shut up and behave. Which is why the NFL itself featured an ad saying 'Everyone should be a centrist!'

Centrists get elected all the time. I would argue being a moderate is very important for winning elections, because people (at least in the Western world) instantly get cold feet at becoming a Communist state, or installing a fascist leader.