> If they don't share my lineage, how are they my people? my nation? my culture?

Because all of those things are a product of nurture, not nature. If your twin was adopted, raised in a different country and didn't speak your language would you still consider them part of your culture?

> You're wrong. Go to any city that experienced mass immigration, and then to a city that didn't. See which one is culturally rich.

Oh, like Paris?

Honestly I'm trying to come up with a large city that didn't experience mass immigration and the only thing that comes to mind is something like Pyongyang. At this point I'm not sure if you meant that seriously, but mass immigration is something that pretty much defines being a large, culturally vibrant city. I come from Rome, and the moment our city was richer both economically and in terms of culture was when it was at the center of the Roman Empire and it was experiencing huge influxes of people from all the corners of the known world.

> I will yield that culture is nurture, but others are not. If my twin was adopted and raised in China, they will not be Chinese. They will still be European.

That's only true if you are racist. To me anyone who grows up fully immersed in Italian culture is Italian. Period. An American who calls themselves Italian, doesn't speak the language and has never visited isn't.

> Yeah, a complete shadow of it's former self. It is completely unrecognizable compared to even 15 years ago. Thieves everywhere.

15 years ago I used to live in Paris, every time I visited more recently I found it greatly improved. Not sure what Paris you've been to. Also mass immigration in Paris is a very old phenomenon. At any point in time in the past 100 years Paris was something like 30% foreign born.

> Tokyo? Warsaw (Before Ukrainian refugees)? Prague? All beautiful cities, safe and culturally rich. They have immigration, which is fine, but not mass immigration. Most of the people you will see are natives with some tourists.

Haven't been to Tokyo so I can't comment, but honestly Warsaw and Prague over Paris? Prague is cute, but it's not much of a real live city, with a bustling cultural scene. It feels a lot more like a museum for tourists. Warsaw, meh.

> Completely false. Mass immigration is what kills cities. It's also illogical. Culture is built upon generations of people. When you mass import foreigners, you are diluting that culture, killing it. It's partially why US cities are less culturally rich compared to EU cities.

If what you mean by culture is some old buildings you might be right, but honestly I'll take NYC, Chicago or LA over Prague or Warsaw any day in terms of culture being produced right now.

> The Roman Empire fell, so not a great example.

The Roman Empire still stood for far longer than any modern nation state.

That's not racism. That's being factual. Nations are bound together by common traits, including ethnicity. Italian, is an ethnicity. Chinese, is an ethnicity.

Racism is denying the European indigineous people the right to their own nation. Why do Europeans have to accept importing immigrants, who, statistically, commit more violent crimes?

> Haven't been to Tokyo so I can't comment, but honestly Warsaw and Prague over Paris? Prague is cute, but it's not much of a real live city, with a bustling cultural scene. It feels a lot more like a museum for tourists. Warsaw, meh.

Way safer and way nicer cities to live in than Paris, but the latter is a personal preference I guess.

> I'll take NYC, Chicago or LA

I remember visiting Google LA's office. There were junkies shooting up at the garage entrance.

What culture is being produced? The culture of gangbangers? Culture of homeless junkies harassing people on the subway?

> The Roman Empire still stood for far longer than any modern nation state.

And they were quite heavily xenophobic too. They did start giving our citizenship more broadly - preceding it's death.