I know most whites have mostly abandoned God and His natural and Divine Law. However, No sin is worse than rejecting Jesus Christ and effectively crucifying Him, which is what most of the Jєωs did to the Messiah. That is worse than Europeans welcoming cultural Marxism after once having the Catholic Faith. ...If you can't understand this simple logic, then it's because you either don't want to understand it or you have cognitive limitations requiring remedial exercises.

Last Tradhican wrote: "Ethno-nationalist? I never heard that term till this thread.  In normal times such a word would not exist, and even debating with a Catholic about it is akin to debating whether a Catholic is allowed to breath.

Forlorn explained:
I'm pretty sure what he meant is that in normal times everyone would be an ethno-nationalist. Just as every Catholic breathes and sees no contradiction in the two, he says being an ethno-nationalist and a Catholic wouldn't be seen as contradictory at all in sane times. Indeed, at no other point in history were people expected to willingly let themselves become minorities in their own countries.

The point, and it's a most relevant point, about the Jєωs is they're of the same race & nation as the apostle Paul who was willing to be accursed from Christ for their well-being, despite the fact they murdered and hated Our Lord. If Paul exhibited such great love and concern for his own race & nation, most of whom rejected the Lord, then there is nothing wrong with white European caucasoid-descended people manifesting ethno-nationalism. Ethno-nationalism can lead people who have gone astray from God back to the Catholic faith, too.

To even think of defending the FACT there is nothing wrong with nationalism and love of ones own peoples (something which is as natural as breathing), is to admit disbelief.

I think you do not really believe what you are saying. If you really believed that you were right, you would not debate with anyone that was against nationalism and love of ones people.

When you debate someone, you also empower them. You are empowering your enemies.

I think it depends on how your ethno-nationalism manifests itself.

Ethno-nationalism strikes me as the default mode of social organization.  Throughout all of human history-- even unto today-- men have organized themselves according to ethno-sameness.  The only difference today is that the oligarchy disapproves and has an aggressive agenda of multi-culturalism, so we are all under the vague impression that there is something vicious about a so-called "ethno-state."  Yet the northeast liberals still ogranize themselves in small, posh communities behind gates.  Hollywood has its walls and borders and guess what? No brothers or day laborers to be seen.  So even if on the macro level the social engineers have managed to blur the ethno-significance of their states, once you zoom in to other levels its obvious how people organize themselves.

Of course this doesn't necessarily prove that such organization is right, only that it is the tendency of man to so organize.  To show that it's right, or at least that there's nothing wrong with it, does not the Church's reticence on the issue through hundreds if not thousands of years speak volumes?  The multicultural state is incredibly new, the traditional state encountered by the Church was one of ethno-natives, and I am completely unaware of her ever rebuking the composition or organization of these states.