Why worse is not better.
Of course, the reaction at this point is that "we shouldn't scapegoat all the refugees" and "don't give in to hate." Surprise! That's why "worse is better" is wrong: there likely isn't any provocation that would or could induce any sort of widespread and coordinated political, social, and/or physical backlash by Whites. Rotherham alone shows that: if a long-time, mass-scale, racially-motivated sexual exploitation of native children (children!) by racial aliens, coupled with a cover-up, doesn't provoke even the slightest response, what makes you think this German event will? Or that the Paris or California attacks will, in the long run, make the slightest difference?
"Worse is better" fails because Whites seemingly have a virtually unlimited capacity for abuse and humiliation.
Here is a thought experiment to clarify the situation. Let us assume that a significant number of NEC refugees let into Germany by Merkel commit some sort of horrific terrorist attack, something which dwarfs the Paris attacks. Let us go further: let us assume that Merkel is videotaped receiving news of this attack, and her recorded response is to smile, laugh hysterically, yell "the damn Germans deserve it," and then to proceed to wipe her ass with the German flag.
What would be the response?
The "movement" would assume some sort of heroic backlash, some sort of uprising, or at least a massive and permanent political shift to the hard Right.
The likely outcome of the above scenario is:
1. An emphasis on protecting migrants from a non-existent backlash, widespread calls for tolerance, loud assertions that "you can't blame all the migrants for a few bad apples," and "vigilance against xenophobic hate."
2. Merkel's behavior will be excused because of the stress she has been under, heroically upholding European values by taking in refugees, in the face of xenophobic, hate-filled opposition. Merkel will be painted as a persecuted, sympathetic figure, and her popularity among native Germans would sharply increase.
3. There will be calls for the better integration of migrants. This attack was the fault of native Germans for not properly welcoming refugees.
4. New "hate speech" laws will be passed, criminalizing any criticism whatsoever of refugee migration. German rightist critics of immigration will be jailed. German crowds will go into the streets in support of the refugees and of multiculturalism and tolerance.
5. Immigration into Germany will be sharply increased, a newly popular Merkel (with the German flag still stuck in the crack of her ass) will issue a call for another million refugees, and the German people will enthusiastically support that.
Think I'm too pessimistic? How about some "movement activist" write an essay at The Occidental Observer, Counter-Currents, VDARE, etc. explaining the flaws in my reasoning. Describe the mighty English uprising to Rotherham, the indignant French backlash, the storming of California by the far-right. I'm waiting.