friedrichjansson wrote:In that case, I would suggest using "racialist" and "ethnonationalist" rather than "racist" and "apartheid," as the latter terms are highly rhetorically charged.
The real official name of Apartheid was separate development. If you read the summary of the former National Party, this really sounds very reasonable. It tried to uplift Blacks without putting the interests of Whites to much at risks. Liberals and Jews (checkout who were the Rivonia Trialists) really hated that.
Noticed that as well. Could Japan's ethno-racial homogeneity and closedness be the reasons for the countries success and prosperity?friedrichjansson wrote:As far as Japan is concerned, it is highly racialist. Naturalization for a non-Japanese is next to impossible. It's difficult even for foreign-born Japanese - they are regarded as culturally alien. But nobody calls Japan racist, because people who say they are anti-racist are really just anti-white. Only whites are ever called racist.
Take a look at the corruption index and compare the top ten to the bottom ten countries. Then check "how blonde" each of those groups are .