the ingroup preference is much stronger on your end

I don't deny that it is. Ingroup preferences historically arise as a response. Knowing whites will become a minority is a warning for soemthing bad, which you agreed to. In this way, whites -- as well as all ethnicities -- should seek to not be minorities.

how does classifying jews as nonwhite and restricting them from office optimal to that goal?

It's more so in response to the doings and opinions of international Jews

if you're creating policy as we go

why not just create a policy which prevents the "international" action

just write in a law about maintaining a certain demographic threshhold

it's no crazier than what you've proposed

If you really boil things down, most any of my opinions politically can be summed in this:
Humans were created and bred in tribal environments and lived in such for the past 200,000 years or so, which is a fraction of a fraction in the evolutionary timescale. Humans have had next to no time to evolve away from tribalism. Multiethnic societies are very new and historically are torn apart (and a fair amount of the time viscerally) due to some ethnic tension. It is best to avoid multiethnic society to keep deep-seated tribal tendencies at bay

And that this has been the way, of course, for millennia until very recently

There is some esoteric Traditional knowledge which has been thrown out with Modernism

we disagree to the degree to which that is true and to the degree that we're willing to invest in it being true

as I said earlier, few studies exist to form a solid conclusion

I'm not an evolutionary anthropologist

I don't think you are either

Well, with what little knowledge there is about human nature, history is not a liar

looking at history

I think the US was great

during the 80's

I want a return to that

whites were >80%

hollywood movies were all arnold blowing shit up

no SJWs

I'm fine with that

I don't want to radically restructure society

people who do that end up with grave results each time

I don't necessarily want to either, because it will restructure itself, I believe. The real problem with any political debate is that they all end up with people talking past each other. You and I could debate the place of minorities every day of the rest of our lives. But until we address the underlying principles behind what informs our opinions, it's meaningless

The real argument you and I were having this whole time was the degree to which humans can escape nature

rather, how severe is that aspect of nature and how much can we trust the results on it

nevermind how ethical or wise it would be structuring society on in your framework, deconstructing it and letting it restructure itself

arguebly, if humans are how you say they are, and society used to plainly reflect it

then where we are is how precisely how society has structured itself

Yeah

Is that to say I'm wrong because America is not in a state of disrepair?

you're wrong to jump to conclusions when we barely have any relevant studies

you might be an actor in society structuring itself

currently, there is a wave of anti-white rhetoric

and the path of whites becoming a minority

no one is saying you shouldn't react to it

what I am suggesting is that you should be react to it within its structure, as understood by the constitution, basic morals etc

as opposed to restructuring it