You could start by taking my criticisms on good faith, chap. You already hacked into my computer, and I tried to provide a foil to your dramatis personae here, independent of my personal views.
From what I understand, your general strategy to enact white nationalism is:
There's a pretty obvious reason why your strategy fails:
- If they hate white people, it probably has less to do with any primary biological or sociocultural characteristics of whiteness, and more to do with the fact that fringe white people keep insisting on whites-only spaces and strong border enforcement.
- If they are apathetic to a white nationalist agenda, it probably has less to do with any of your ideological certainty, and more to do with the fact that you are currently maintaining a perspective that is so contrary to U.S. party line politics as to negate any possibility of IRL political influence outside of something that looks a lot like terrorism.
Replace is the wrong word, have you looked at the linear projection on population growth since the 60s? There are
double the number of existing people on the planet.
Bad faith debates only ever really occur when your opponent is (i) never going to concede to your opinion due to dogmatism, or (ii) secretly on your side, making strawman arguments. An opponent who is merely analyzing your argument's flaws is a constructive debate partner regardless.