You are a fucking intruder in their country. They are not interested in allowing anyone in. They don't owe you anything. You, knowing full well that you lack legitimate grounds for receiving asylum, imposed yourself onto them, which basically amounted of you robbing them of thousands of euros spent on your asylum processing and lawyer fees, and your housing.

>Therefore I have all ground for the political protection

You knew that only you would ever think that. So it has been a premeditated stealing from the Dutch.

>And racism is the highest virtue of individualism,

Individualism presupposes individual focused norms, i.e. individual justice, not group justice. A group can't be responsible for the deeds of an individual and vice versa an individual can't be responsible for the deeds of his group's members, regardless of the way in which the group has been assigned to them, subjectively by observers, or through self-identification. That's the foundation. Hence racism is anti-individualist. It's been said to you many times that you are not an adherent of individualism but of tribalism. But evidently your cognitive dissonance resolution mechanisms are severely damaged so you are none the wiser.

>Individualism presupposes going against all group norms

Yup. Especially against individualist group norms I suppose, since it would be a group norm once there is a second member. If there is ever another believer in "Sadkov's individualism", don't forget to immediately kill him, since evidently killing is the only way to "go against something" in "Sadkov's individualism".

>Accepting others as equal to you is anti-individualist. Individualists always look into what distances them from others and makes them better than others.

Would be hilarious to read your thoughts about the inner workings of such a "society". Please explain this to us. How do "individualists" (which is a group by the way) resolve conflicts among themselves, such as contract violation or any other tort, considering they all believe they are better than others? Who enforces the order or guarantees property rights? How do "individualists" protect themselves from non-"individualist" organized groups without a "communistic" command hierarchy and taxes? Or maybe individualists live as hermits, isolating themselves from others, falling prey to non-"individualists" one by one? Who knows...

>It can. Once you identify yourself with said group, you are responsible for it.

You are imposing your tribalist ethics on others. By your inane logic, if some schmuck says he's a believer in Sadkov's individualism, goes and offends some Chechens or black gang members, then you are responsible for his actions by your own belief, and Chechens have a right to whoop your ass. And don't tell me that common belief in Sadkov's "individualism" doesn't make you a group. If it were so, most religions, especially unorganized ones, wouldn't be groups.

There are myriads of ways people could be grouped, such as "bipedal humanoids with hairy chests", "employees of some company", "men with female like tities" etc etc. Some are self-recognized and some are not. You are also responsible for all the female-titied male programmers in the world, since are a self-acknowledged female-titied male programmer.

In essence your ideology implies "going against all groups", going against the whole world, because everyone is a member of a group.

Would you ask Russians if they believe they are Russian or not, before committing your planned acts of violence? You won't, because you are lying. You don't care about self-identification one bit. You hate Russians regardless of what they think about themselves, and you hated them before you've invented this ideology. Don't tell me you'd stop hating Russians if they all said they are no longer Russians and have nothing to do with each other. Racism has always been an essentialist ideology. It's about grouping people by their ancestry, actual or not, and assigning that group inherent characteristics, like stupid, ugly, or evil.

You've demonstrated hate towards n-th generation immigrant Russians, i.e. people with Russian sounding names, without ever asking them if they completely reassessed their self-identification or not (many have). And you definitely don't care about the distinction between the implied group membership through ancestry, and group membership through belief in the political identity. I don't believe in Russian political identity as Putin has formed it, but you hate me nevertheless.

For most people group membership is a fact, not a belief or a choice. Most think they or others are Russian or American simply because they were born on a certain territory or to certain parents. That's the informal convention. A Chinese person can't believe he's not of Chinese descent, when he was born to Chinese parents, unless they are insane like yourself.

Most Africans you ever had contact with don't even identify as black people, the same way Russians don't identify as white(unless they are into image boards). That's primarily an American concept. They identify first and foremost as their African ethnicities. But you identify them as "niggers" without asking them.

Similarly there are many Russian citizens who are not ethnic Russians. Many Finno-ugric peoples (Veps, Komi, Karelians, Mordvins, Mari, Udmurts) are victims of russification and colonialism, something that is now called ethnocide. They don't necessarily believe they have anything in common with each other, but they are grouped by others through their language group and their genetic ancestry. Nor do they believe they are ethnic Russians. And yet you generalize them as "Finno-Ugric mongoloids", together with ethnic Russians for some reason, and hate them, even though you've never had any contact with them. All without caring about their self-identification.

Just shows that you don't care about any consent of someone you've grouped, or any actual data about self-identification. You are the ultimate judge and the arbiter on who's what. So it's just plain old racism without any veneer of being a political belief system once you strip the lies.

>And that group is responsible for you, since it has accepted you as a member.

Group acceptance is even more nebulous concept than self-identification. "Niggers" for example don't have any democratic polling body that could determine the level of acceptance. And we all know you couldn't care less about what "niggers" think about their membership in the group "niggers".

Anyway, "group responsibility" is not how individualism has ever been defined. You are just using commonly understood words with your own insane definitions. Do you by chance believe that using your own incomprehensible to others language is also a virtue of individualism?

The entirety of your ideology is incoherent lies and obfuscation, trying to build an ideological facade for your hate towards Russians (and black people, to feel more western), like the big boys had done before, only much more intelligently.

>So say MGTOW is racist

Not only has the moron defined his own individualism, which is in reality more akin to psychopathic tribalism for serial killers, but has also redefined "racist" as having nothing to do with race or ancestry. Amazing.

>And calling to kill all Russians is called racism.

As is calling to kill all "men with female-like tities" who know they are "men with female-like tities", according to your logic.

>Christianity, Islam, Nationalism - all forms of Communism.

At least call it collectivism. You sound like a complete cretin who redefined half the dictionary and tries to communicate with people, futilely.

Как же у меня бомбануло от индивидуализма с групповой ответственностью. Я наверно полтора часа высирал эту простыню, в состоянии аффекта наверно. Сейчас стыдно на это смотреть.

>Individualist can't belong to any group. By the definition of being individualist

Google finds 520 occurrences of "individualist group norms" on the internet. So it's by your retarded definition, not by the commonly understood one.

Your individualists are a group by the virtue of having common behavior and belief system. If there is an infestation of Sadkov's individualists in a forest, with accompanying theft and murder around the forest, a more primitive tribal society would immediately treat you as a group and exterminate everyone who could be identified by the apparent behavioral patterns, such as distancing, thinking they are better than others etc. A modern EU country would designate the ideology of Sadkov's "individualists" as extremist, ban communicating it, and the group itself as an extremist group. Similarly Sadkov's individualists in the forest, even though they believe that they are not a group on the surface level, will be forced to learn to identify other "individualists", effectively treat themselves as a group, known type of people, because they are more psychopathic and dangerous to deal with, and have significantly different behavior. So cognitively, "individualists" will be treated as a group by everyone, and they will be a group while there is a single non-individualist remains to think of them as a group explicitly.

"We are not a group" is not that different from "We are blessed by the God after we accepted him in our hearts". Just a belief.

>YOU use search engine (a tool) to find nonsense defined by retards like yourself.

Are there any "non-retards" other than you who definite individualism in similar ways? I know of similar views, but those are not called individualism. It's impossible to find anything but individualisms that have group norms. So neither I nor google to blame.

Almost all occurrences of that word sequence come from academic writing. Maybe they are "commies" (as defined by you), i.e. non "Sadkov's individualists", but their raw intelligence and overall mental health is likely much higher, by the virtue of them being able to finish higher education and advance in an academic career. Don't be jealous.

>Why do you scum always need some authoritative opinion?

It's not about authoritative opinions. It's about common language use. Attempting to communicate using personal definitions without disclaimers or careful descriptions is just wacko behavior.

>all universities and kill all professors, nothing of value will be lost.

I guess they've invented the 5 nm lithography process without academic knowledge(quantum mechanics, material science, microscopy etc) and government funded research programmes. You can also look up who contributed to development of DNNs and machine learning in general. They are ALL academics, either in universities or in monopolists' research labs, or in both, which are not different because academics there also publish research and don't develop any products.

>make them any more trustworthy

Their work is at least usually internally consistent, without glaring flaws. Even in humanities. That couldn't be said about anything of your making.

>race theory papers.

Critical race theory is just academic anti-white racism. You shouldn't look down upon fellow racists.

So they treated you as a white, without asking if you identify as white. Oh the horror. They grouped you without consent. The same way they would group your individualists, without caring about what they believe.

>I'm obviously tatars mixed with finno-ogres. Once you've seen one, you've seen them all.

>and insist going his own way.
>kill all Russians is called racism.

There is one big non sequitur buried here. How does one go from insisting on going their own way to killing all Russians/niggers? If racism is separation and distancing oneself, it's definitely has nothing to do with killing.

Europeans, Ukrainians, Americans, all your destination countries of choice are all sill groups with group norms, which they would enforce onto you. So you are basically saying that you need your own autonomous country, or you would start killing people (commies/niggers), because you are locked with them, they don't allow you to go your own way, you lack common interest with them, and you can't be represented by a shared government.

What size of country do you need to be at peace?

>If you hate some nigger

There was nothing about hate in your definition of racism above. It was about "rejecting that you have something in common with the niggers, and insisting on going your own way". "not having something in common" != hate, unless you automatically hate everyone you don't have something in common with(all the people).

If you already hate someone, why hide behind some contrived "individualism", lie to yourself and others, when you can just be honest with yourself, and say that killing someone you hate is what you want regardless, and it's just a little bit lower on your wish-list than having a career in game development or something. That would explain your behavior much better, and it's not inconsistent.

>Once you identify yourself with said group, you are responsible for it.

You also called yourself "white trash". So you are responsible for the deeds of any trashy whites around the world. Very individualistic.

So you lied? You are not white? Who cares? You explicitly said that you are "white trash", so you self-identified with them. That's enough by your definition to be responsible for them, for any of their deeds. You also called yourself of being of Ukrainian descent. That's also self-identification. So you are also responsible for Ukrainians.

Who cares about Russians or being white? That's not the subject of discussion. The subject of discussion is your moronic anti-social tribalism where you ended responsible for millions of people by your own definitions, which is antithetical to any sane definition of individualism.

>I'm white.

I guess you reiterate your responsibilities.

Yeah yeah. The whole world trades with Russia, has diplomatic relationship with them, doesn't try to destroy them and does not currently isolate them, which is aiding and abetting of course, so the whole world owes you and is liable for destruction as accomplices.

Russian scum:
>yes, Dutch owe me

yes, the Dutch owe you a good kick on your Russian scum ass

You are useless and unhelpful.