>90% white
>7th most white state in the USA
>4th largest state in the USA
>in the rocky mountains
>in a forest range
>above 45 degree latitude
>has more different species of animals than any other state
The only problem is containing the cancer known as Richard Spencer. Can anyone prove me wrong?
/mlpol/ - My Little Politics
Archived thread
File (): 0E17BB015E75A37EAC756F9326503F16-3074911.png (2.9 MB, 1300x880, montana.PNG)
File (): 8ECA481928B2404B7A62EA1E62249CF4-738996.jpg (721.7 KB, 1600x1066, gnppic.jpg)
>>214610
No. I think NWF are a bunch of larping retards who think they actually have a chance of subverting washington state.
No. I think NWF are a bunch of larping retards who think they actually have a chance of subverting washington state.
>>214608
>>214610
>>214612
I actually kind of agree with OP. Montana is something like 86% white, it's absolutely beautiful country out there, and land is reasonably cheap. I basically agree with the NWF's idea that racially conscious whites concentrating population and resources in a limited area would be a better short-term strategy than trying to reverse the demographic tide of the entire US. I just disagree with where they geographically want it located. I'm an Oregonfag, and I can pretty much attest that the West Coast is a lost cause at this point. The entire I5 corridor is basically the California Empire. However, I think Montana, the Dakotas, possibly Wyoming and Nebraska would be doable.
>>214610
>>214612
I actually kind of agree with OP. Montana is something like 86% white, it's absolutely beautiful country out there, and land is reasonably cheap. I basically agree with the NWF's idea that racially conscious whites concentrating population and resources in a limited area would be a better short-term strategy than trying to reverse the demographic tide of the entire US. I just disagree with where they geographically want it located. I'm an Oregonfag, and I can pretty much attest that the West Coast is a lost cause at this point. The entire I5 corridor is basically the California Empire. However, I think Montana, the Dakotas, possibly Wyoming and Nebraska would be doable.
Can I join?
>>214642
Ports would just mean us importing more niggers. Why exactly would a modern ethnostate need a port?
Ports would just mean us importing more niggers. Why exactly would a modern ethnostate need a port?
Secession, especially for white purposes, would be always opposed by ZOG. The only way it could work is if the country collapses and splits apart, and then why settle for just one remote ethnostate?
>>214685
South Rhodesia is a pretty good example. The only country it could trade with was South Africa. At least with a port you can do some good ol' fashioned smuggling.
>>214685
South Rhodesia is a pretty good example. The only country it could trade with was South Africa. At least with a port you can do some good ol' fashioned smuggling.
>>214688
If the country does fall apart there will still be the same demographics lingering in the same areas. We would have to start out small at least short term.
If the country does fall apart there will still be the same demographics lingering in the same areas. We would have to start out small at least short term.
What about Vermont? 92 % white. Bluepilled mostly, but can be taken by force and expanded to the atlantic coast.
>>214695
County-based level is best. Ethnostates wouldn't be established along existing state lines anyway.
County-based level is best. Ethnostates wouldn't be established along existing state lines anyway.
File (): E44A9584C7707F3528C895AC697F38D3-4306246.jpg (4.1 MB, 2583x3608, 8154f73d6604dea836c21fa1978beb42.jpg)
>>214688
Unlike South Rhodesia, though, a union of the Great Plains/Midwestern States could make use of an extensive rail system, plenty of air bases, and connections to the largest river system in the world, and all of that is not even including the wealth of resources the region has already that would make it self-sustaining for the most part.
Unlike South Rhodesia, though, a union of the Great Plains/Midwestern States could make use of an extensive rail system, plenty of air bases, and connections to the largest river system in the world, and all of that is not even including the wealth of resources the region has already that would make it self-sustaining for the most part.
>>214734
Nobody mentioned anything about Germany, but its success is due to a large number of various reasons.
Nobody mentioned anything about Germany, but its success is due to a large number of various reasons.
File (): C332C3AB032C1B7785034939A5886C5D-34636384.mp4 (33.0 MB, Resolution:640x360 Length:00:07:05, A Night at the Garden - NYC 1939.02.20.mp4) [play once] [loop]
>>214642
>Any ethnostate would be doomed to failure.
You should add "At the current stage".
The Ethno-State is our goal.
I add a video made by a cryptojew who thinks it will make us look bad, on the contrary, White Identity is spreading like fire and they are panicking.
"A Night at The Garden". New York City, Madison Square Garden, February 20, 1939.
>Any ethnostate would be doomed to failure.
You should add "At the current stage".
The Ethno-State is our goal.
I add a video made by a cryptojew who thinks it will make us look bad, on the contrary, White Identity is spreading like fire and they are panicking.
"A Night at The Garden". New York City, Madison Square Garden, February 20, 1939.
>>214642
>>214980
A few things. First off, it's not 1800 anymore. Sea is no longer the only effective means of mass transport of goods. We have trains, airplanes, highways, and pipelines to ship goods and materials across the land, besides smaller vessels to ship goods along rivers.
What exactly does Asia have that any new state so vitally needs such that it cannot survive without it? And I specify "Asia" because that's the only part of the globe a port on the East Coast would be good for. Goods coming from Europe, Africa, Western South America, or the Middle East would be far cheaper to arrive in port from New Orleans and then take a land route to the North West via train, which is exactly how such goods arrive now. I doubt many shipping companies would be very willing to go out of their way to try to service ports in Washington specifically with trade from the U.A.E.
What are you needing to import? If you need to import food from Mexico (which may be cheaper by land) or from Indonesia, then I very seriously question exactly how long this ethnostate would last. If you need to mass import oil, why not just base the ethnostate in Alaska instead, which is the fourth largest oil producing state in the U.S., voted for Trump by a 15% margin, has a port, has a tiny population of 737,000, and has a large fishing industry? Why not use the state of North Dakota, which is the second largest oil producing state in the U.S., has a tiny population of 760,000, and voted for Trump by a massive margin of 35%. Why not the state of Wyoming, which produces a massive 760 million barrels a year, mines 39% of U.S. coal, has a tiny population of 557,000, and voted for Trump by a massive 46% margin?
Washington State, by contrast, has an utterly huge population of 7.1 million, voted for Hilary by a margin of 16%, and is utterly dependent on oil imports for its energy supply. While Washington has an established agriculture sector and produces 69% of the nation's apples, I am skeptical as to whether it would be self-sufficient on the whole. Montana, North Dakota, and perhaps Alaska by contrast are definitely self sufficient and can sustain much larger populations, while Washington and Oregon are probably at or beyond capacity. Washington state does have a respectable petroleum refining infrastructure, but it imports its oil from Alaska and Canada, at which point you kind of have to ask why not just use Alaska for the Ethnostate, or a different U.S. Canadian border state if you were just going to pipe over your oil from Canada anyways? The only things Washington has going for it economically, besides the Aerospace industry, are things like banking, culture, and big tech – industries that are firmly in the control of the enemies of any new ethnostate, and which will be more of a hindrance than a help.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_refining_in_Washington_state
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/100515/us-states-produce-most-oil.asp
What are you hoping to export through these ports? These states are net importers of oil, and I don't think apples are going to be enough to make it worthwhile.
All of this is of course besides the biggest problem with insisting on taking the ports of Seattle and Portland, which is the cities of Seattle and Portland themselves. The city of Seattle has a population bigger than that of Wyomming, almost as large as North Dakota, and about the size of U.S. state of Alaska at 730,000. It is well known as being a haven of leftist liberalism in the United States. It was the first city to ban plastic straws, it was the first city to enact a $15 minimum wage. It is, simply put, one of the main bastions of opposition to any possible ethnostate. It is not going to be easy, at all, to take. It will be extremely difficult to hold. On top of all of this, Seattle is right across the bay from U.S. Naval base Kitsap, which is the largest naval base in the region, and would be surrounded on all sides by the alleged new ethnostate. Portland Oregon is in basically the same situation, and really is not at all better for these purposes.
Do you believe that a landlocked ethnostate in Montana-North Dakota-Alberta will be given trade sanctions from the governments of the U.S. and Canada? If you have answered yes, then why do you believe that the U.S. will allow these states to succeed in the first place, when the last attempted secession was met with severe military force? And if you have answered this with “we will fight/we will wait until the U.S. collapses,” why not just pick an area that actually has a kind of possibility of repelling an invasion or will succeed anyways, like the American South and Texas? And after all of that, can you be so sure that a port wouldn't simply be blockaded by the U.S. Navy like the Confederacy was in the U.S. Civil War?
And if after all of that, you still absolutely insist that “there MUST be a port,” what is wrong with the Alaskan ports of Juno and Anchorage? That state isn’t swarming with as many leftists, and actually has resources.
Hungary is landlocked and is effectively an anti-globalist Ethnostate, and it gets along just fine. States like Germany in the World Wars had ports, but couldn't use them and still starved to death. Having a port is less important than picking a region that would actually support a white nationalist cause, and has enough energy and food production within its borders to not starve and freeze to death in the event of a trade embargo.
>>214980
A few things. First off, it's not 1800 anymore. Sea is no longer the only effective means of mass transport of goods. We have trains, airplanes, highways, and pipelines to ship goods and materials across the land, besides smaller vessels to ship goods along rivers.
What exactly does Asia have that any new state so vitally needs such that it cannot survive without it? And I specify "Asia" because that's the only part of the globe a port on the East Coast would be good for. Goods coming from Europe, Africa, Western South America, or the Middle East would be far cheaper to arrive in port from New Orleans and then take a land route to the North West via train, which is exactly how such goods arrive now. I doubt many shipping companies would be very willing to go out of their way to try to service ports in Washington specifically with trade from the U.A.E.
What are you needing to import? If you need to import food from Mexico (which may be cheaper by land) or from Indonesia, then I very seriously question exactly how long this ethnostate would last. If you need to mass import oil, why not just base the ethnostate in Alaska instead, which is the fourth largest oil producing state in the U.S., voted for Trump by a 15% margin, has a port, has a tiny population of 737,000, and has a large fishing industry? Why not use the state of North Dakota, which is the second largest oil producing state in the U.S., has a tiny population of 760,000, and voted for Trump by a massive margin of 35%. Why not the state of Wyoming, which produces a massive 760 million barrels a year, mines 39% of U.S. coal, has a tiny population of 557,000, and voted for Trump by a massive 46% margin?
Washington State, by contrast, has an utterly huge population of 7.1 million, voted for Hilary by a margin of 16%, and is utterly dependent on oil imports for its energy supply. While Washington has an established agriculture sector and produces 69% of the nation's apples, I am skeptical as to whether it would be self-sufficient on the whole. Montana, North Dakota, and perhaps Alaska by contrast are definitely self sufficient and can sustain much larger populations, while Washington and Oregon are probably at or beyond capacity. Washington state does have a respectable petroleum refining infrastructure, but it imports its oil from Alaska and Canada, at which point you kind of have to ask why not just use Alaska for the Ethnostate, or a different U.S. Canadian border state if you were just going to pipe over your oil from Canada anyways? The only things Washington has going for it economically, besides the Aerospace industry, are things like banking, culture, and big tech – industries that are firmly in the control of the enemies of any new ethnostate, and which will be more of a hindrance than a help.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_refining_in_Washington_state
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/100515/us-states-produce-most-oil.asp
What are you hoping to export through these ports? These states are net importers of oil, and I don't think apples are going to be enough to make it worthwhile.
All of this is of course besides the biggest problem with insisting on taking the ports of Seattle and Portland, which is the cities of Seattle and Portland themselves. The city of Seattle has a population bigger than that of Wyomming, almost as large as North Dakota, and about the size of U.S. state of Alaska at 730,000. It is well known as being a haven of leftist liberalism in the United States. It was the first city to ban plastic straws, it was the first city to enact a $15 minimum wage. It is, simply put, one of the main bastions of opposition to any possible ethnostate. It is not going to be easy, at all, to take. It will be extremely difficult to hold. On top of all of this, Seattle is right across the bay from U.S. Naval base Kitsap, which is the largest naval base in the region, and would be surrounded on all sides by the alleged new ethnostate. Portland Oregon is in basically the same situation, and really is not at all better for these purposes.
Do you believe that a landlocked ethnostate in Montana-North Dakota-Alberta will be given trade sanctions from the governments of the U.S. and Canada? If you have answered yes, then why do you believe that the U.S. will allow these states to succeed in the first place, when the last attempted secession was met with severe military force? And if you have answered this with “we will fight/we will wait until the U.S. collapses,” why not just pick an area that actually has a kind of possibility of repelling an invasion or will succeed anyways, like the American South and Texas? And after all of that, can you be so sure that a port wouldn't simply be blockaded by the U.S. Navy like the Confederacy was in the U.S. Civil War?
And if after all of that, you still absolutely insist that “there MUST be a port,” what is wrong with the Alaskan ports of Juno and Anchorage? That state isn’t swarming with as many leftists, and actually has resources.
Hungary is landlocked and is effectively an anti-globalist Ethnostate, and it gets along just fine. States like Germany in the World Wars had ports, but couldn't use them and still starved to death. Having a port is less important than picking a region that would actually support a white nationalist cause, and has enough energy and food production within its borders to not starve and freeze to death in the event of a trade embargo.
File (): 5FBE8CF4B5FEF6DB6F6412B16363FB5C-145741.jpg (142.3 KB, 650x650, 1Der795RJ0.jpg)
>>215008
>Having a port is less important than picking a region that would actually support a white nagionalist cause, and has enough energy and food production within its borders to not starve or freeze to death in the event of a trade embargo.
Something important to consider is media coverage to everywhere else in the world. (Depending on how the situation is.) Being carpet bombed with napalm does not sound fun.
It's going to need to be too costly to destroy, and visible enough that others would support it if shit hits the fan, and not a direct threat to normies life style.
If there is no communication (((they))) will go oy vey they are bringing ((())) in there doing horrible things! Yes goy rape, pillage, and do what you will with them! No mercy.
>Having a port is less important than picking a region that would actually support a white nagionalist cause, and has enough energy and food production within its borders to not starve or freeze to death in the event of a trade embargo.
Something important to consider is media coverage to everywhere else in the world. (Depending on how the situation is.) Being carpet bombed with napalm does not sound fun.
It's going to need to be too costly to destroy, and visible enough that others would support it if shit hits the fan, and not a direct threat to normies life style.
If there is no communication (((they))) will go oy vey they are bringing ((())) in there doing horrible things! Yes goy rape, pillage, and do what you will with them! No mercy.
There is a real white separatist movement currently forming in the PNW.
I recommend reading The Brigade by Harold Covington. It's an instruction manual in the form of a fictional novel on how to win a colonial war written by someone who had personally witnessed 2 of them. Don't mind people flinging shit in Harold's direction, he was a good man but unfortunately he died last year. focus on the content and the movement.
Check out the groups if you're interested in Northwest Separatism.
>White nationalist group, no particular ideology, Started by Harold himself and has a good podcast
Northwestfront.org
>National Socialist group. Has a younger crowd
Thenewawakening.org
No religious discussion is allowed in either of them. Serious white nationalists only.
Hail Victory
I recommend reading The Brigade by Harold Covington. It's an instruction manual in the form of a fictional novel on how to win a colonial war written by someone who had personally witnessed 2 of them. Don't mind people flinging shit in Harold's direction, he was a good man but unfortunately he died last year. focus on the content and the movement.
Check out the groups if you're interested in Northwest Separatism.
>White nationalist group, no particular ideology, Started by Harold himself and has a good podcast
Northwestfront.org
>National Socialist group. Has a younger crowd
Thenewawakening.org
No religious discussion is allowed in either of them. Serious white nationalists only.
Hail Victory
>>215405
I imagine most people forget that Wyoming even exists. It's a bit like Iowa and Arkansas in that regard.
I imagine most people forget that Wyoming even exists. It's a bit like Iowa and Arkansas in that regard.
whatever you do, don't accept outside funding
25 replies | 6 files | 16 UUIDs | Archived