Calling the US one of the most libertarian states at it's founding doesn't really erase it's fundamental reliance on a regressive, authoritarian institution like slavery.

None of this has any bearing on my original question or point, which was 1) what's wrong with wanting racial homogeneity and 2) there's no reason racial homogeneity and authoritarianism have to go together.

So they expect there to be a group of second class citizens with no ability to change their status in this country?

People who want an ethnostate theoretically want to live in a country where their race or ethnicity is the majority and it stays that way. I don't see what's so hard to understand about that.

Do you even know what an ethno-state is? Japan allowing non-ethnic-japanese to naturalize, by definition, excludes it from the ethno-state label.

I just told you multiple times how I'm defining ethnostate. I don't care what you want to call it lmao, you can call it a hooplesnoof for all I care, it's the concept that's relevant.

Let's just agree to disagree.

You never even offered an answer to the original question, so yeah.