A poster on an internet forum raised an important issue. He noted that, when trying to persuade other White people to embrace White nationalism (WN), a moral argument should be made for it. Perhaps something like this, although you may want to make up your own argument(s):
1. If non-Whites have some sort of “right to survive” (as groups of people), then so do Whites – in fact, since Whites gave the world almost everything of value, we may have more of a right to survive than non-White peoples.
2. Countries that are run by Whites are safer, healthier, cleaner, more lawful and more productive. In fact, all of the races within a country benefit when that country is run by Whites. It’s the most moral type of rule [1]. Under non-White rule, the opposite is true – just look at the current South Africa. Everyone is suffering there, Blacks and Whites alike. Ditto Zimbabwe. The non-White management of a country is harmful to all of the citizens and is therefore immoral.
[1] if the subject of slavery is brought up, why not wonder aloud if the negroes would rather be living in mud huts in Africa, wearing grass shorts and throwing spears