A New Concept to Address Borderline Cases: Provisional Whiteness

'Are jews white?'

To answer this, we would first need a definition for 'White.' This definition varies from person to person, and therefore what groups qualify as 'white' also varies from person to person. The argument in this case is largely one of semantics. But beneath the semantic argument are people with agendas. IE, those who choose a definition that does not include jews, are arguing with the agenda to exclude jews from any future white ethno-state, and in general excluding jews from any collective concern or loyalty from other whites. Those who choose a definition that does include jews, are arguing with the agenda to include jews into any future white ethno-state, and in general include jews in any collective concern or loyalty for other whites.

The idea that someone is arguing solely for the sake of objective truth, that they simply want people to follow the English language and admit 'white' means 'white,' cannot be believed. Because white is itself an arbitrary term that has no basic definition in the English language, and has been used variably to include or exclude different people all the time.

Here is the webster's dictionary of white: "2 a : being a member of a group or race characterized by light pigmentation of the skin"

Characterized, but not wholly defined by, light pigmentation of the skin. Otherwise albinos would be 'whites.' It's more like webster's is saying "a race best known for its light skin color." That's all well and good, but it's still far too vague to define white entirely. Our race may be best known for light skin color, but other traits also belong to it, that it is less well known for, but equally necessary to be white. For instance our wider hips, our higher body fat ratios, the shape of our skulls, the shape of our noses, the shape of our lips, etc. So putting the dictionary definition aside as rather vague and useless, we must seek our own definition.

There are other definitions: White means 'sharing X amount of alleles with various other white ethnicities.' White means 'people of European descent.' White means, 'displaying characteristics that typify aryan ideals,' White means, "Caucasians, Mestizos, Indians, and all other mixed race offspring." White could mean a dozen other things, they are all equally valid. There is no higher arbiter of truth that can say one person's labels or categorizations are wrong, and we must abide by some other labels or categorizations. Every single one of these definitions also agrees with the Webster's definition of 'has light skin.' They all could, technically, be the 'right' definition.


Categories and labels are simply tools to better understand the world around us, which of course doesn't fit into any categories or labels. The world simply is, and every single piece of it is interconnected with every other piece. There are no firm dividing lines, or strict categories, to anything. Various people over time have found it useful to categorize the races so that they could make their points, or persuade others about what should be done, about racial matters. All of their categories and labels are arbitrary, they have no basis in reality, they are simply tools for the mind to better grasp the problem, to find a pattern in the madness and bring order to a disordered set of data. To those with an agenda to exclude jews, their categorization of white has shifted to fit this agenda. To those with an agenda to include jews, their categorization of white has shifted to fit this agenda. Since categories are made in order to sort data for the sake of better analysis, both groups are perfectly justified in their having done so. The question then is not 'who is white?' or 'what is the definition of white?' Since this is arbitrary and can be categorized any which way. The real question is 'whose agenda is right?' If the agenda to exclude jews is right, we should obviously define white in such a way that it excludes jews, as that helps us exclude jews. If the agenda to include jews is right, we should obviously define white in such a way that it includes jews, as that helps us include jews.

The argument is entirely circular. Philosemites think jews should be included, therefore they are white. Antisemites think jews should be excluded, therefore they aren't white.

Even if we go by the 'objective' data of "white means sharing X alleles with other white ethnic groups." We are left with a debate over just what number X should be. Philosemites will put X at a number which conveniently includes jews. Antisemites will put X at a number that conveniently excludes jews. The only purpose of the scientific data is to find where X needs to be to include or exclude jews, and then state authoritatively that X is precisely that amount. The argument retreats a step to pore over genetic trees like old wise men pored over cracked chicken bones, but the result is the same. Philosemites will say jews are clearly white, antisemites will say jews clearly aren't white.

Here is a tree showing how related jews are to other white ethnic groups:















As you can see, jews are pretty closely related to whites. But they are less related than any other European ethnicity. Antisemites can draw the line exactly between Finns and Jews, and say, 'everyone to the right of this line is white, everyone to the left isn't. Sorry jews, you just didn't share enough alleles. We measured the numbers fairly and you didn't make the cut.'

Philosemites can make their own argument for why Jews should be included, and everyone to the left of jews clearly aren't white, and everyone to the right, including jews, are white.

Even more comical, we can imagine Philosemites someday proving that jews are more closely related to other white ethnic groups than Finns. Then they'd demand inclusion of jews into the white race. Antisemites would simply reply by throwing Finns under the bus. "I guess we were wrong, both Finns AND Jews aren't white, since neither of you share enough alleles to be white." That is the only concession antisemites would give philosemites, if the data turned out differently. They will never agree to include jews as whites, no matter what the genetic data says. This is because it was never about the genes. This is because the definition of 'white' is much deeper than simply sharing various alleles. People who aren't willing to admit this just end up sounding arbitrary, since they simply include or exclude jews by allele counts that suit them, instead of on any rational firm line that exists regardless of where jews place on it.

Personally, I don't think jews are white. My definition of white is partially genetic. IE, if some genetically pure white, whitest of white whities, were to become a rapper with his pants hanging down and speaking ebonics, raping women and drinking themselves into a stupor every night, I'd sigh and say "yes, he's white. The genes are just too clear to deny. He's white just like the rest of us." But the further out of the genetic mainstream said white becomes, the more provisional his whiteness becomes. There is then a large segment of people on the genetic fringes who are provisionally white, henceforth their white status is determined not by their genes, but by their loyalty, behavior, and culture. If these people practice religions alien to whites, like Islam, or if they call for the genocide of the white race, like Susan Sontag, or if they attack and slander whites at every turn, if they marry non-whites, or simply act like a bunch of thugs, idiots, or scum, they are non-white. Mind you, this is only in cases of provisional whiteness. If you are clearly genetically white, and do all of the above behavior, you're still white. But if you are genetically far away from the center of genetic whiteness, you are provisionally white, and your behavior and loyalty tips the balanced scales one way or the other.

For instance, Georgians and Armenians aren't white. Why? No real reason. I just don't like Georgian and Armenian behavior recently. They are warmongers and whiny victimologists. They cry out in pain while hitting other people, a trait so typical of non-whites but not of whites, who when they attack others do so from a lion-like belief in superiority and mastery, which needs no excuses for hurting others. I have some respect for Lebanese Christians, though not Lebanese muslims, so Lebanese Christians are provisionally white and the Muslims are non-white. I don't like jews or want to include them, so they aren't white. Jews have not been loyal to the welfare of the white race, but instead have done everything in their power to undermine it. Therefore they move from 'provisionally white' to 'non-white.' If jews changed their behavior, they could move from 'non-white' to 'provisionally white' again. Only by interbreeding with other whites and eliminating their genetic distance from us, could they ever be qualified as 'pure white,' where their behavior no longer has any impact on their whiteness. So long as they stay jews, they can only be 'provisionally white.' Right now they are not even provisionally white, since they are an enemy to the white race in everything they say and do.

If someone is 3/4 white and 1/4 black, he's provisionally white. If he acts like a decent white man who calls himself white and defends other whites, he'll stay provisionally white. He can never be pure white, because he is too genetically distant. But he can be provisionally white. If he identifies as a black and walks around with a chip on his shoulder blaming everything on whites and saying 'kill the white man,' then he's a black. For this reason, Jeremiah Wright, who's clearly genetically closer to white than black, is a black. He lost his chance at whiteness by damning us to hell. See how it works? In all borderline cases, the cases constantly thrown at us by anti-racists: "Well what about mixed races? What about jews? What about Armenians? What about --?" The answer is now solvable. "These people are provisionally white, their own behavior will determine whether they are included by us, or excluded by us, as white or non-white." If anyone wants to be included by us, all they have to do is 'act white.' Behave well, behave righteously, identify yourself as white, and be loyal to the white race.

Even if most jews are non-whites, righteous jews can still be included as provisional whites. There is no reason to punish jews collectively. We can judge them one by one, as individuals. I see no reason in excluding all jews just because of the actions of others they have no control over. That isn't fair.

The next question people will have, is, 'why define anything genetically? If you grant that provisionally white people should be sorted by their behavior, why not just do that with everyone?' That would be fine, except for this minor problem -- without the white genotype, the white phenotype cannot exist. We must preserve the white genotype, even if complete idiots and jerks belong to it, and even if angelic saints don't belong to it. This is because the white genome is innately good, regardless of how it ends up displaying itself. It is the most evolved life form on Earth, the closest to perfection, the greatest invention, the greatest artform, of God almighty. Even if the white race weren't the best (which it is), if it has any goodness to it that other races lack, it would still merit preserving for the sake of that quality alone. Our blue eyes and blond hair are just those sorts of unique traits, innately good, and needing to be preserved, regardless of anything else. Less provable, but just as true, our sense of honesty, our compassion, our artistic sense, and our creativity, are other unique traits that must be preserved, even if we were overall worse than other races.

Just like on any product line, sometimes something goes wrong and a 'white' turns out dysfunctional. This does not mean we should shut down the product line. It just means we should use quality control and deal with the errors as they arise. If we were to sort people by anything other than genetics, we would quickly lose the entire white genome. Whites are only 10% of world population, they are only 2% of the population of women of child-bearing age. We are going extinct. If we were to allow non-whites in by any other sorting method than white genotype, we would be swamped. Miscegenation, territory loss, loss of economic opportunity, uncomfortableness of being around large numbers, discrimination or hatred by other races towards us, all sorts of various factors would swarm in like killer bees to extinguish our line.

Therefore, we cannot allow inclusion or exclusion on any other basis except whether you are 'white' or not. People who are genetically similar to us, have the privilege of being less of a threat to our genome, and thus we can extend a more welcome hand to them. Provisionally white people have tickets to our country that non-whites can't have, by virtue of their being closely related to us. But they don't have an olly olly entrance free policy, because they are genetically distinct enough, that they simply aren't worth the effort if they are going to be traitors or parasites.

The next question is, does the fact that sorting by any policy other than genetics would lead to our outright extinction, require that we include people solely by whether they are 'white' or at least 'provisionally white?' My argument would be no. Again, I prefer nuance. Although it is true that including people simply on the basis of IQ, hard work, virtuous lifestyle, good looks, or any other measure would extinguish the white genome via too much immigration, there is no reason why we can't include SOME of these exceptionally good people from elsewhere. Instead, we should have three tiers of acceptance.

First Tier: Genetically white, whitey-mc-white-whites. These people should be given free admission to the country, on the sole basis of loyalty and abiding by the laws we set forth. This is the easiest level of admission.

Second Tier: Borderline cases, provisionally white. These people would be included on a case by case scenario, based on their loyalty, behavior, and character. This is a stricter standard than the previous standard, but admission is still open. IE, as many people of this type as qualify, are allowed in.

Third Tier: Non-whites. These people would again be included only as individuals. But they would have to have exceptional abilities. For instance, an IQ no less than 120. Perfect health. Good looks. Extremely talented athletes. Extremely rich. Skilled workers. Scientists or artists who have proven their stuff. You get the idea. In addition, they must be loyal to our race and abide by our laws. Obviously, if they make trouble, they're gone. Whatever compassion or patience we show for the first tier, will not be shown to the third tier. And in addition to this, they can at no time exceed 10% of the population. So no matter how qualified you are, if our quota is full, you can't enter. Through this simple measure, the white genome can't be extinguished, AND we can select non-whites for their quality. This way, we do not cut ourselves off from the gifts and genes of exceptional non-whites, but we do not destroy ourselves either. It's fair and balanced. If non-whites resent all the restrictions we put upon them, tough, they still have the rest of the world to live on. They don't have to live here. Humorously enough, even if jews weren't provisionally white, I'd still allow many of them in as non-whites with exceptional ability. Excluding jews entirely, who hold the secrets to a 15 IQ boost somewhere in their genes, would be sheer folly.

With this the debate over who is white or not should end. We can simply call all borderline cases Provisionally White, and include them or exclude them on the basis of individual character, rather than genetics. Of course, a new debate would be struck up, who is 'pure white' and who is 'provisionally white.' I'm sure philosemites will start arguing that jews should be included as pure white instead of provisionally white, etc. But surely the absurdity would have to stop somewhere. The very fact that a jew's whiteness is debatable, proves they aren't pure white, but are clearly provisionally white. If jews were pure white, the genetic tests would not put them so far away from the rest of the white race, and so many people wouldn't be questioning their whiteness. They are not pure white. They are not 'as white as English or Germans.' No one in their right mind can argue that. They are provisionally white. Instead of focusing on antisemites and making us include whites through sheer bullying, philosemites should instead be focusing on jews and making sure as many of them as possible qualify as provisionally white, and thus qualify as fellow members of our ethno-state. Since it is possible for every single jew to be provisionally white if they please, and it is possible for jews to interbreed with whites and have pure white progeny after a couple generations, philosemites have the power to include every single jew in a white ethno-state and keep them there forever. I can't imagine a fairer compromise.

If antisemites won't make this compromise, then they risk our ability to make any sort of ethnostate at all, by drawing an inordinate amount of hostility from the most powerful people on earth, while simultaneously driving away fair-minded and compassionate whites from the 'overly harsh' restrictions that 'look like Hitler's Germany.' If philosemites won't make this compromise, they risk driving out all whites from a cause that no longer represents or defends them, and becoming a hollowed out shell that says all the semitically correct things, but has no force of will and inspires no one.

There's only about thirty years left before whites become a minority in all their homelands. I urge all people who wish to stop this to put their agendas aside and compromise around the concept of Provisional Whiteness.