Well, yes, they are. How else do you think nations continued to exist? There would be no China if Chinese women had not continued to have children with Chinese men.
It also reeks of a certain “lustfulness,” as if it’s “love” and not mere lust that’s the reason for most mixed-race marriages (if they marry at all.)
Not that I am a fan of existence or life in general, or even support what Andy Nowicki calls the “breeder rhetoric” on the right. Not at all. However, I support this even less, because it is just a veneer for justifying lustfulness; and it is what globalists want (they know it is destructive).
Good points raised by Samuel T. Francis in his article “Morality Not The Only Target on Monday Night Football”:
[…]
It was an intentional act of moral subversion.
[…]
But the ad’s message also was that interracial sex is normal and legitimate, a fairly radical concept for both the dominant media as well as its audience.
[…]
Breaking down the sexual barriers between the races is a major weapon of cultural destruction because it means the dissolution of the cultural boundaries that define breeding and the family and, ultimately, the transmission and survival of the culture itself.
[…]
Gómez Dávila:
Once he settles down in the country he admires, the foreigner bastardizes exactly that which he admires.
Even the enemy of technology denounces its public, but trivial, outrages more than its invisible, but disastrous, destructions.
(As if contemporary man’s feverish migration, for instance, were disturbing because of traffic accidents.)The racist errs by believing that pure races exist, the anti-racist by believing that the ingredients of a beverage are of no importance.