> In France, it's about 63%.

How do you even measure that? What counts as French?

(I'm reminded of this from the first page of a famous novel: La race, ce que t’appelles comme ça, c’est seulement ce grand ramassis de miteux dans mon genre, chassieux, puceux, transis, qui ont échoué ici poursuivis par la faim, la peste, les tumeurs et le froid, venus vaincus des quatre coins du monde. Ils ne pouvaient pas aller plus loin à cause de la mer. C’est ça la France et puis c’est ça les Français.)

Multiple generations being French and one of the ethnic groups that originally made up France - which are all sub European groups.

Genocide is not population migrations and cultural assimilation.

White Europeans came to the Americas and went to war, violently enslaving and slaughtering millions upon millions of indigenous people.

That is genocide.

Nazis forcefully rounded up Jews and shoved them into concentration camps, slaughtering them in an industrial fashion by the millions.

That is genocide.

Pol Pot took 1 in 4 of his citizens and KILLED them. That is genocide.

You can't just redefine words to make your non-issue seem like a grave problem, because it is nothing of the sort, otherwise, of course, you wouldn't feel the need to represent it as something that it isn't.

Those were genocides. That doesn't make this any less of a genocide.

I am using UN's definition of genocide. Mainly those two are in effect:

1. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

2. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

As well as the mental element:

A mental element: the "intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such";

https://www.un.org/en/genocide-prevention/definition

Since you claim this is happening, I ask you to provide a single example of a European government "imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group." If you're going to try to claim that promoting immigration counts as that, please explain how having a neighbor of the wrong ethnicity stops you from having children, because that is what "prevent[ing] births" actually means.

Sure. Unaffordable housing. People refrain from having kids because they are unable to afford a house to start a family in, and often resort to living with their parents or sharing a house with multiple roommates.

Millions of foreigners will increase the price of housing. They have to live somewhere.

Another way is wage suppression. By importing millions of foreigners, it drives the labour wages down as now they have to compete with others. This means that they may not be able to afford to start a family, and makes single income family unrealistic.

I have no problem with having neighbour of a different ethnicity. I interact with other ethnicities daily, and they are great people. My problem is with MASS immigration.

This is amazing, not one of the three points you yourself choice to cite apply in any way to the current situation. You could try to twist their meanings, really torture those words, squint to the point of blindness, and it's still just laughably incompatible with reality.

Yet somehow, you think, "Yesss, this is right on, this describes my reality."

Jesus Christ man, this is just tragic.

> 1. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

> 2. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

> As well as the mental element:

> A mental element: the "intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such";

the "intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such";

is absolutely happening. That's why Europeans are becoming a lower percentage of the population in their own countries.

> 1. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

Lower the birth rate of the group while importing foreigners to replace them.

> > 2. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

Unaffordable housing, suppressing wages to make single income households impossible for most. Both contributed to by mass immigration.

> What is it if not white genocide?

The normal process of cultural evolution and assimilation.

There's nothing normal about it.

Culture is not evolving, nor is assimilation happening. It is the replacement of the native people with foreign. White genocide.

Dude you do you understand how much intra-European racism has existed from the dawn of time? How many factors within a single insular "ethnostate" people still found a way to latch onto to get their tribal jollies off on like religion and class?

Have you ever heard of the Cagots?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cagot

Virtually nothing about them do we understand as having been in any way distinguishable from others around them in their society and yet they were persecuted for hundreds of years.

It's such a stupid instinct in people, grow out of it.

And? Are you saying genocide is normal or what's your point?

The native people of Europe deserve their homeland to remain theirs. Access to European lands to other ethnicities is not a right.

This is pointless, can lead a horse to water and all that. I'm going to stop responding as HN is the one place on the internet I try to get away from all the mindless ragebait.