The language of "rights" is absolutely the wrong way to frame this problem. We do not have a "right" to exist. We do exist. The question is, will we continue to? Appeals to "rights" suggests that there should be some consensus about whether we exist or not, and that some neutral party should enforce our right. Our right to exist is simply our will to continue existing, to continue fighting, to continue asserting our will. That's it.
Let's look at a very well argued case for raw milk written in the 1940s.
https://www.raweggstack.com/p/ancestral-eating-the-case-for-raw-bb2
https://www.raweggstack.com/p/ancestral-eating-the-case-for-raw-bb2
Raweggstack
ANCESTRAL EATING: The Case for Raw Milk
Let's look at a very well-argued case for raw milk from the 1940s
Here's my latest opinion piece for Infowars, on why you still aren't allowed to notice certain obvious facts about grooming gangs in the UK.
https://www.infowars.com/posts/the-war-on-noticing-continues/
https://www.infowars.com/posts/the-war-on-noticing-continues/
Infowars
The War On Noticing Continues
"Political correctness is a war on noticing," says Steve Sailer