Can there actually be an ethnostate?

[Al Gulud]

I've always thought this was a joke but sometimes I see idiots who are legit serious about this. This thread isn't asking for your reasons for wanting but your plan for how it can happen.

 

[wylfım]

Stop globalization. Stop trying to keep the country together. People naturally segregate if you let them, just dont do anything about it and then the two ethnicities will naturally split up into two states.

 

[Lysenko]

There is, it's called Vermont.

 

[Thomas Paine]

There is one, Israel.

 

[Audit]

Why an ethnostate and not one set up by political interests? Give it enough time and the liberals can rule the east and west coasts while forcing the conservatives into the rust belt.

 

[Draza]

Yes, look at here in the Balkans, especially Croatia.

 

[IV 445]

You guys are talking about unintentional ethnostates. An isolated island of homogenous people is not really an ethnostate. It has to be enumerated somewhere in sovereign law that “only X people can purchase land, wed people, work here or live here.” That’s a true ethnostate.

 

[Audit]

You guys are talking about unintentional ethnostates. An isolated island of homogenous people is not really an ethnostate. It has to be enumerated somewhere in sovereign law that “only X people can purchase land, wed people, work here or live here.” That’s a true ethnostate.

So pretty much Japan.

 

[Snuckening]

You guys are talking about unintentional ethnostates. An isolated island of homogenous people is not really an ethnostate. It has to be enumerated somewhere in sovereign law that “only X people can purchase land, wed people, work here or live here.” That’s a true ethnostate.

Places that have laws giving one racial group special rights, it's because they're multi-race societies; Apartheid South Africa, Israel, early 90s Rwanda/Burundi, nazi Germany, Malaysia, the Jim Crow South, etc.

If your society is already racially homogenous, you don't need laws specifying all that stuff; the only laws that need to specify race would be immigration laws (or just keep immigration to an absolute minimum, or zero).

Your 'deliberate ethnostate' would need to start off multi-racial (because why make laws specifying race if everyone's the same race anyway? That law would do nothing), and end up racially homogenous, and AFAIK that's never happened- You can't put the racial toothpaste back in the tube (or at least no-one ever has, that I know of). Or else it'd need an 'unintentional ethnostate' to write a bunch of laws that serve no purpose, and needlessly piss off the rest of the world, all to pursue something they already had in the first place.

There is one, Israel.

(Not to defend Israel- legitimately one of the worst gov'ts anywhere, but...) Israel is about 1/4 arab. Thats far from ethnically homogenous.

 

[Glad I couldn't help]

Central/Eastern Europe has a good many ethnostates, where the national ethnicity has an overwhelming majority. Note that this wasn't case a hundred years ago when the regions was under the rule of various empires (German, Hapsburg, Russian and Ottoman). This vibrancy was destroyed by the collapse of those empires into smaller nation-states that eventually had border shifted and their minority populations swapped or destroyed. This is part of why the governments there are so hostile to Muslim migration.

(Not to defend Israel- legitimately one of the worst gov'ts anywhere, but...) Israel is about 1/4 arab. Thats far from ethnically homogenous.

I think being ethnostate is more than just demographics; one of the clear purposes of the Israeli state is being a Jewish state, and that is reflected in its immigration and naturalization policies. In this way, it is as much a successor state of the Austro-Hungarian Empire (Herzl was a subject of Franz Joseph, after all) and the Russian Empire as it is of the Ottoman and British Empires.

 

[Capital Punishment]

Forced Interracial Marriage and a Jew Cleanup crew

 

[Hellbound Hellhound]

History shows us that the only way you can carve an ethnostate out of a previously ethnically diverse society is through ethnic cleansing. Anyone who tries to claim otherwise is either delusional, or lying to you about their true intentions. Without exception, violence and persecution is where these ideas ultimately lead, and attempts to implement them are invariably unsuccessful beyond the short-term anyway.

A society which is fundamentally built on a mistrust or dislike of difference is destined to crumble under the weight of it's own internal contradictions and strife, so why bother to create such a society in the first place? Even if you are completely unmoved by any moral objections to such an idea, a pure consequentialist approach isn't going to save you. The idea is doomed either way.

Stop globalization. Stop trying to keep the country together. People naturally segregate if you let them, just dont do anything about it and then the two ethnicities will naturally split up into two states.

You can't stop globalization. It is inevitable that with greater technology, human society will become increasingly centralized. This has been a consistent trend since the dawn of the agricultural revolution, and it is clearly a manifestation of the human propensity towards power accumulation. This is no less a part of human nature than the tribalism you mention, and if you look at history, it consistently wins out in the end.

Societies which embrace the idea of different people working together peacefully are able to accumulate more power than societies which embrace the edict that people should separate themselves into their own tribes. This is one of the reasons that the United States is so powerful, while Russia's power has diminished since the fall of the Soviet Union. The former continues to look outward, while the latter has turned inward.

 

[lowkey]

There are four ethnostates, japan, israel, north and south korea.

You don't have to have 100% of an ethnicity to have an ethnostate, just a strong majority and a value of keeping a strong majority.

The reasons why I prefer to live in an ethnostate (even inside one that isn't my own ethnicity), is that areas with a single dominant ethnic group are more peaceful and every group (including outgroups) experience higher trust, security and community.

Everyone who doubts this should read Putnam's study or any of the hundred studies on multiculturalism that have been done.

People already self-organize around ethnicity for the most part. And you can get there at the state level once the majority in a democracy sees the data and agrees.

Israel is a fairly young country and is one example how it could be done. There are more peaceful ways to get there.

 

[Al Gulud]

There are two ethnostates, japan and israel.

You don't have to have 100% of an ethnicity to have an ethnostate, just a strong majority and a value of keeping a strong majority.

The reasons why I prefer to live in an ethnostate (even inside one that isn't my own ethnicity), is that areas with a single dominant ethnic group are more peaceful and every group (including outgroups) experience higher trust, security and community.

Everyone who doubts this should read Putnam's study or any of the hundred studies on multiculturalism that have been done.

People already self-organize around ethnicity for the most part. And you can get there at the state level once the majority in a democracy sees the data and agrees.

Israel is a fairly young country and is one example how it could be done. There are more peaceful ways to get there.

Nigga I already said I don't care that you want one I want to know how it could happen in a diverse country.

 

[lowkey]

If you don't care about what I want to write, why should I care about what you want to ask?

How did it happen in israel? Mass migration, violence, propaganda, aggressive settling and marginalizing the other group.

Say south africa wants to stop their disproportionate murder of white farmers and marginalization of xhosa africans by bantus. They coukd choose to find a peaceful solution. Agree to parcel up the land into say, three countries. Voila three ethnostates, roughly speaking.


I mean how did a country like germany become multicultural in the first place? That is a situation less than a 100 years old. They could choose to reverse that and take 4-5 decades to put in different laws that are aimed at promoting remigration of non-germans. If they would completely cut their welfare system for example, there are many that would gladly prefer to go back to the country of their ancestors (or another european country). That is a way that a european country could transform it to an ethnistate.

If you read documents from the 70s from eugenicist groups started by rockefeller, they brainstormed about ways to reduce fertility. About half the measures proposed have become status quo in western countries. These are publically available documents offered by the organisations themselves.

Now whether they were the ones that effectwd those changes is another matter, that may not be the case.

But with patience and political will, it's easily possible to "undiversify" a nation.

Or you can go the 1804 Haitin way of creating an ethnostate. I am never much in favor of that path.

History shows us that the only way you can carve an ethnostate out of a previously ethnically diverse society is through ethnic cleansing.

Poland got closer to being an ethnostate as a result of jewish mass-migration to israel.

The US didn't so much massacre natives as bred them into (out of?) their population. Not to say there were no massacres, but unless you take jared diamond at face value, ethnic cleansing was not the dominant factor. Mass migration was.

You're mostly right about history, but we also have never seen the mass migration movement around the globe at any point in history as we see now, so to say the only way is through cleansing seems inaccurate. The bantu didn't become the most populous group of south africa as a result of ethnic cleansing.

But they could if they wanted at this point parcel up the land and claim an ethnostate encapsulating most of south africa.

 

[spurger king]

In the past yeah but now any of you could buy a plane ticket to anywhere right now. It's gonna be an ethnoworld in maybe a couple of centuries which isn't shit compared to the 200,000 years since humans evolved.

 

[lowkey]

Buying a plane ticket to somewhere is not the same thing as being allowed to stay in a country.

Try it with North Korea, Israel or Japan and let me know how it goes.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

Palestine is an ethnostate too for Palestinians. It is literally a capital crime in Palestine to sell land to Jews, or to aid Jews in any way. Of course, Palestine still has to deal with Israel stopping their glorious ethnostate from coming into being. North Korea is among the finest examples of an ethnostate around, but like Palestine, it was never very diverse to begin with. They don't like non-Koreans much there.

Israel is a fantastic example as well of an ethnostate, since it was created for the sole purpose of being the homeland for the Jews and nowadays has implemented even more policies to make it clear to the Palestinians that they're a Jewish ethnostate. If for some reason you want an ethnostate in today's diverse world, Israel is ironically the example to follow.

 

[Hellbound Hellhound]

Poland got closer to being an ethnostate as a result of jewish mass-migration to israel.

The US didn't so much massacre natives as bred them into (out of?) their population. Not to say there were no massacres, but unless you take jared diamond at face value, ethnic cleansing was not the dominant factor. Mass migration was.

You're mostly right about history, but we also have never seen the mass migration movement around the globe at any point in history as we see now, so to say the only way is through cleansing seems inaccurate. The bantu didn't become the most populous group of south africa as a result of ethnic cleansing.

But they could if they wanted at this point parcel up the land and claim an ethnostate encapsulating most of south africa.

The Native Americans lived in tribes of small numbers, similar to how the Aboriginals lived in Australia. Comparing how they were demographically replaced by large and coordinated colonial powers to the current situation in the US and Europe is ludicrous. There is just no comparison.

The Jewish comparison similarly fails, because they were fleeing Europe to avoid the possibility of another genocide. The way that you gloss over the historical context in order to make the case that this was an instance of peaceful repatriation is intellectually dishonest to say the very least. These people left Poland after millions of their relatives had been exterminated on an industrial scale.

How about you find me an example of a nation state with the ethnic diversity of France or Germany successfully making the transition to a country with the ethnic diversity of say, Japan, without resorting to violence or persecution. I don't think you can do it, and I think you know it.

 

[lowkey]

How about you find me an example of a nation state with the ethnic diversity of France or Germany successfully making the transition to a country with the ethnic diversity of say, Japan, without resorting to violence or persecution. I don't think you can do it, and I think you know it.

You've already made my case for me by moving the goalposts from "ethnic cleansing" to "violence or persecution".