Is the "gassing ALL kikes" mentality rational?

Yes.
The gassing part is non economic, though.

it's a joke, dumbass

I'm just debating if exterminating is a better option than making your enemy submit completely.

If you're a kike that doesn't want gassed, get out of white countries. For all the shilling kikes do for Israel, they never get the fuck out and stay there.

If your enemy is not exterminated he will rise again.

Of course user.

What you fail to understand, is that Jews are not human, like Whites are human. They lack empathy.
Why?
B/c Jews are very heavily neanderthal. they are an older, outdated organism, that lacks the abilities and behaviors that make whites so powerful.

Jews lack the full aryan genes, which means they will never posses the ability to have full geniuses like whites do.
Therefore, they should be eradicated.

Thank you for your reply user.

It makes perfect sense and for some reason I have never really thought about the fact that there is no way "to find a way to divide up the good jews from the bad". Especially considering their natural gift of lying through their fucking teeth.

continued, what you also fail to understand, is that the jews have been given too many chances already.
Our empathy for inferior lifeforms, is exactly why we are facing extinction now.
So GET RID of your EMPATHY for INFERIOR LIFE FORMS, which are NOT OF YOUR RACE.

Judaism is a religious ideology.
How else can you be sure no Jews exist if you can't read their minds?

Christcuck here, but no, it's not.

Murder is immoral.

If you ground morality in racial identity, a la "goodness means what is good for the whites" you cannot bridge the is-ought gap. There is nothing inherent in the facts of white genocide to create any imperative on my will, that I should evaluate this fact as being undesirable.

The fact is that I do see it as undesirable, but if I did not or simply did not care, there would be no rational argument that could force me to change my evaluation.

So the racial moralists have to postulate another fact. This has to be a fact about the human will, namely that the human will is of such a nature that it cannot help but desire the good of its own race. This is the real upshot of arguments that "tribalism is natural" for instance. If you cannot help naturally desiring the good of your own race, the is-ought gap is bridged.

However the flaw is in thinking that the good of one's own race is the ultimate good, the ultimate principle of moral action. Actually the ultimate moral principle is the good of one's own self. The good of my race is good insofar as it is good for me individually.

It is good for me, individually, to be the sort of person who is virtuous, charitable, and so on. And by the same token, it is good for me to have the virtue of caring for my own people with a special tenderness.

But it is bad for me, individually, to have the crime of murder on my conscience, or to rob myself of the opportunity of loving God's rational creation in all its forms.

The good of my race, in this case, is superseded by my individual need to be a loving person.

So genocide is not moral, nor is it rational, even if it contributes to the good of my race, because the racial good is not the ultimate good.