What is White nationalism?

[resister]

I keep hearing this term"White nationalism"Is this a bad thing?If it means you are proud to be "White"and proud of your nation, so be it, sign me up.Never apologize for being white...or black for that matter.On a side note, why have I never heard of "Black nationalism"?Is that bad also?

[FindersKeepers]

I'm confused and conflicted about this.

Originally, things like Miss Black America were intended to give blacks a foot-up in the societal norms that whites enjoyed, but it backfired. The black-pride, Hispanic-pride, gay-pride and any other selective-pride initiatives set group of people AGAINST others -- against white males, specifically.

As far as race goes -- there is nothing to be proud of. Pride should be reserved for something earned -- not something that can't be controlled.

I'm not proud to be white, just as I am not proud to be female. I AM proud of the skills I've obtained in my lifetime. I AM proud of the things I've accomplished. Race isn't something to be proud of. I do enjoy taking part in my cultural heritage events -- it makes me feel connected to my ancestors.

The specific "pride" groupings are nothing more than the flipping-off others.


Edited to say -- "White nationalism" is slightly different. I digressed with the pride thing and now I don't have time to address the other. Later.

[MMC]

As Dan Proft put it.....this was brought out due to the gathering in DC by White Supremists. Pushed by White Nazi's and Kluckers. Trump has denounced them.

The Leftness was out squealing that they are the ALT Right.....which is a delusion of reality. Which can be expected by the left. These groups are not of the Right. They are of the left. Fascists, and Communists are of the left. That's the bottomline and there is no inbetween.

[donttread]

I keep hearing this term"White nationalism"Is this a bad thing?If it means you are proud to be "White"and proud of your nation, so be it, sign me up.Never apologize for being white...or black for that matter.On a side note, why have I never heard of "Black nationalism"?Is that bad also?

If you really want to see some serious racism against whites try:
1) Organizing a "White Congressional Causus"
2) A "White lives matter" movement .
3) An "Naawp"
4) A "United Caucasion College Fund"

Then sit back and watch Jesse Jackson stoke out and the shit hit the fan about how racist WE White people are. I think they call it a double standard and as long as we attempt to deal with racism as a one directional thing we will fail. For example a great many blacks are racist towards whites, hispanics, even Jews for some reason, but you never hear shit about it from MSM

[stjames1_53]

This is the downswing of the American English. Words that have one definition, is change for convenience sake. I think we know what "nation" is. It is a country with a particular people. Germans>Germany, Italians>Italy. It was merely a descriptive word about a person's relationship to a specific country or area.
Along comes Hitler and establishes a National Party which he uses as a weapon against the Germans, first, and Europe second. His members were called "Nationalists"....one thought, lock-stepped for Party views, philosophy of Nationalism.
So, we have the word (National-ism, et al)change from status to political beliefs. Nationalism takes an ugly coat.
Here in the US, when I see the word Nationalist, or Nationalism, I think of the status: We are all Americans. First. That makes all of us, every last one, Nationalists. Black Nationalists, Latino Nationalists, etc. We are supposed to be a melting pot, not a nation of special groups of people. So, the term Nationalist, when used correctly, is accurate when applied to any American.
When it is used with "White" it has no impact.

[Standing Wolf]

These groups are not of the Right. They are of the left. Fascists, and Communists are of the left. That's the bottomline and there is no inbetween.

Conservatism as a political ideology is not responsible for the words and actions of White supremacists, and Conservatives should not have to apologize for them in any way. On the other hand, it's clearly in error to label White supremacists "of the left", when the social and political views of Conservatism are mirrored almost exactly in those groups' agendas. Liberals, too, have their odd cousins and funny uncles, which Conservatives are forever, unfairly, tossing up in their faces. Both sides must recognize that, while we don't have to explain or justify certain groups and individuals, it's delusional to pretend that their views are not 90% in alignment with our own.

[Crepitus]

If you really want to see some serious racism against whites try:
1) Organizing a "White Congressional Causus"
2) A "White lives matter" movement .
3) An "Naawp"
4) A "United Caucasion College Fund"

Then sit back and watch Jesse Jackson stoke out and the shit hit the fan about how racist WE White people are. I think they call it a double standard and as long as we attempt to deal with racism as a one directional thing we will fail. For example a great many blacks are racist towards whites, hispanics, even Jews for some reason, but you never hear shit about it from MSM

Most of both houses are already white males.

If you think we need "white lives matter" you have completely missed the point.

The USA is the NAAWP. We have all the advantages, are the majority of the population, and get all the breaks. The whole nation is pretty much set up for us.

Except for the few specifically set up for minorities they are all United Caucasian College funds.

[Crepitus]

I keep hearing this term"White nationalism"Is this a bad thing?If it means you are proud to be "White"and proud of your nation, so be it, sign me up.Never apologize for being white...or black for that matter.On a side note, why have I never heard of "Black nationalism"?Is that bad also?

Just like any ideology it runs the full spectrum. At its mildest it's pretty harmless pride in being white, which it fine, not racist. Everybody should be proud of who and what they are.

At the other end lies racism and hate, the KKK and the American Nazis. Burning crosses, Jim Crow, lynchings.........

[Chris]

Conservatism as a political ideology is not responsible for the words and actions of White supremacists, and Conservatives should not have to apologize for them in any way. On the other hand, it's clearly in error to label White supremacists "of the left", when the social and political views of Conservatism are mirrored almost exactly in those groups' agendas. Liberals, too, have their odd cousins and funny uncles, which Conservatives are forever, unfairly, tossing up in their faces. Both sides must recognize that, while we don't have to explain or justify certain groups and individuals, it's delusional to pretend that their views are not 90% in alignment with our own.


I can't help but react that maybe the reflection of conservatism is not actually conservatism but the liberal view of conservatism. I keep trying to figure out exactly what conservatism, as I understand it, has to do with the racism of white nationalists like this small group following Spencer, which includes, for purposes of diversity, lol, Tila Tequila--and keep wondering why such a group is taken seriously at all.

[Chris]

Just like any ideology it runs the full spectrum. At its mildest it's pretty harmless pride in being white, which it fine, not racist. Everybody should be proud of who and what they are.

At the other end lies racism and hate, the KKK and the American Nazis. Burning crosses, Jim Crow, lynchings.........

But when all that happened it was a movement lead by Democrats, right on up to Stromberg's filibuster of civil rights.

[Cthulhu]

Most of both houses are already white males.

If you think we need "white lives matter" you have completely missed the point.

The USA is the NAAWP. We have all the advantages, are the majority of the population, and get all the breaks. The whole nation is pretty much set up for us.

Except for the few specifically set up for minorities they are all United Caucasian College funds.
False.

Fear profits a man nothing.

[Cthulhu]

I keep hearing this term"White nationalism"Is this a bad thing?If it means you are proud to be "White"and proud of your nation, so be it, sign me up.Never apologize for being white...or black for that matter.On a side note, why have I never heard of "Black nationalism"?Is that bad also?
Ultimately it is a group of people who would like to preserve their race and heritage.

Sadly there is a lot of racism within their ranks, many saboteurs as well.

White nationalism is grossly misunderstood. Some things about it are great, but others are not so great.

Biggest problem is that their is no single unified definition of what it actually is. So their opponents have no valid opposition leaving the narrative to "evil Nazi skin heads who practice polygamy while smoking meth in the woods".

Fear profits a man nothing.

[Cigar]

I keep hearing this term"White nationalism"Is this a bad thing?If it means you are proud to be "White"and proud of your nation, so be it, sign me up.Never apologize for being white...or black for that matter.On a side note, why have I never heard of "Black nationalism"?Is that bad also?
Roland Martin Confronts White Nationalist Richardhttp://newsone.com/3597206/roland-martin-confronts-white-nationalist-richard-spencer-on-newsone-now/

[Chris]

Ultimately it is a group of people who would like to preserve their race and heritage.

Sadly there is a lot of racism within their ranks, many saboteurs as well.

White nationalism is grossly misunderstood. Some things about it are great, but others are not so great.

Biggest problem is that their is no single unified definition of what it actually is. So their opponents have no valid opposition leaving the narrative to "evil Nazi skin heads who practice polygamy while smoking meth in the woods".

Fear profits a man nothing.



That's true, it can simply mean a preference for a specific racial/ethnic group as defining nation, white separatism. One can easily compare this to black nationalism. Or it can mean feelings of supremacy, white supremacy, like with Spencer and his followers, including Tila Tequila.

[Cigar]

That's true, it can simply mean a preference for a specific racial/ethnic group as defining nation, white separatism. One can easily compare this to black nationalism. Or it can mean feelings of supremacy, white supremacy, like with Spencer and his followers, including Tila Tequila.

Education is historically considered to be the thing that levels the playing field, capable of lifting up the less advantaged and improving their chances for success.

"Play by the rules, work hard, apply yourself and do well in school, and that will open doors for you," is how Karl Alexander, a Johns Hopkins University sociologist, puts it.

But a study published in June suggests that the things that really make the difference — between prison and college, success and failure, sometimes even life and death — are money and family.

Alexander is one of the authors of "The Long Shadow (http://hub.jhu.edu/2014/06/02/karl-alexander-long-shadow-research)," which explored this scenario: Take two kids of the same age who grew up in the same city — maybe even the same neighborhood. What factors will make the difference for each?

To find the answer, the Hopkins researchers undertook a massive study. They followed nearly 800 kids in Baltimore — from first grade until their late-20s.

They found that a child's fate is in many ways fixed at birth — determined by family strength and the parents' financial status.

http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2014/08/07/335285098/rich-kid-poor-kid-for-30-years-baltimore-study-tracked-who-gets-ahead

[Chris]

Education is historically considered to be the thing that levels the playing field, capable of lifting up the less advantaged and improving their chances for success.

"Play by the rules, work hard, apply yourself and do well in school, and that will open doors for you," is how Karl Alexander, a Johns Hopkins University sociologist, puts it.

But a study published in June suggests that the things that really make the difference — between prison and college, success and failure, sometimes even life and death — are money and family.

Alexander is one of the authors of "The Long Shadow (http://hub.jhu.edu/2014/06/02/karl-alexander-long-shadow-research)," which explored this scenario: Take two kids of the same age who grew up in the same city — maybe even the same neighborhood. What factors will make the difference for each?

To find the answer, the Hopkins researchers undertook a massive study. They followed nearly 800 kids in Baltimore — from first grade until their late-20s.

They found that a child's fate is in many ways fixed at birth — determined by family strength and the parents' financial status.

http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2014/08/07/335285098/rich-kid-poor-kid-for-30-years-baltimore-study-tracked-who-gets-ahead


Not sure what this has to do with white nationalism or what I posted but I'll bite.


Education is historically considered to be the thing that levels the playing field, capable of lifting up the less advantaged and improving their chances for success.

and


"Play by the rules, work hard, apply yourself and do well in school, and that will open doors for you," is how Karl Alexander, a Johns Hopkins University sociologist, puts it.

are two different things altogether. The latter is just the plain old Protestant ethic of getting what you want by working for it, while the formed is the political agenda wrecking public education.\


They found that a child's fate is in many ways fixed at birth — determined by family strength and the parents' financial status.

I have read a number of studies that support the importance of family. I've also seen studies that peers are more important than family. We need only look at the great Justice Thomas to see financial status is not so crucial. --One should never try to draw conclusion from a study or even a few, just not the nature of scientific method.

[Archer0915]

Most of both houses are already white males.

If you think we need "white lives matter" you have completely missed the point.

The USA is the NAAWP. We have all the advantages, are the majority of the population, and get all the breaks. The whole nation is pretty much set up for us.

Except for the few specifically set up for minorities they are all United Caucasian College funds.

Whites do not have all the advantages and the nation "WAS" set up for Christians.

[exploited]

White nationalism - like black nationalism, and all other forms of race-based nationalism - is what happens when ignorant people confuse the melanin content of their skin with the moral content of their heritage.

Indeed, the idea that your ancestors did things you are proud of because the width of their nose or their average height is clearly stupid, and yet some take skin colour seriously.

It is plainly absurd. Why should an Irishman under British rule be proud of "white men," when it was white men who suppressed them and enslaved them, based on their perceived inferiority?

The most important takeaway from the modern racial egalitarianism movement is that while there are differences between the average black and the average white, the scope of these differences is actually less than the differences observed within each racial group.

To conclude, race-based nationalism is at the heart of racism itself, and must never be condoned. This is why I am opposed to things like Black History Month, or affirmative action - they judge the worthiness of interest by the colour of skin rather than the content of character. Meanwhile guys like Benjamin Banneker are interesting, smart and successful enough to warrant study any day of the year. In fact, pride in his accomplishments makes more sense than taking pride in some white guy with lesser accomplishments, merely on the grounds that he is white.

[Chris]

The problem with discussing a topic such as this is not yourself sounding superior, which is what happens when you fail to distinguish racial/ethnic preferences from feelings of racial superiority,

[Cigar]

Changes Happens ... always has, always will.

The day someone figures out how to stop it, let me know.

[Grizz]

As it's being used today it is an epithet being tossed around by the Left in an attempt to denigrate and isolate what is happening to them. As usual they think that they can marginalize and minimize the people who voted for Trump.

[Cigar]

As it's being used today it is an epithet being tossed around by the Left in an attempt to denigrate and isolate what is happening to them. As usual they think that they can marginalize and minimize the people who voted for Trump.

I'm not going to marginalize or minimize Trump Supporters, I'm going to take them at their world and remind them at every opportunity what they were willing to "forgive" and "forget".

Trump Supporters say don't take Donald Trump Literally, but take him Seriously ...

Donald Trump said; Mexicans are Rapist and Murderers
Donald Trump said; Black People are Lazy
Donald Trump said; you can can just Grab their Puzzies
There are plenty more ... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-racist-examples_us_56d47177e4b03260bf777e83

So, which of these should I take Literally or Seriously?

I know for a fact that being an official of the Government, that having a Private Email Server is wrong and should be explained in the Court of Law.
So why should I "forgive" and "forget" what Donald Trump has "PUBLICLY" said in the court of Public opinion?

If Donald Trump constantly and publicly put down your ancestry, would you "forgive" and "forget" that and still Vote for him?

[Crepitus]

But when all that happened it was a movement lead by Democrats, right on up to Stromberg's filibuster of civil rights.

Everybody knows the democrats were originally against the civil rights movement. You and the other conservatives here will remind us every 5 minutes lest we forget.

But lets not fail to mention how the ideology has switched its loyalties to the right, and been embraced, especially lately, by the Trumpkins and their illustrious leader and namesake. Yes yes, I know that finally, under pressure and harsh media criticism he did eventually halfheartedly denounce them, but a late and lackluster denial it was. Add that to some of the people he is stacking his cabinet with and I would have to say it's not a good time to be a person of any color other than white.

[Cigar]

Everybody knows the democrats were originally against the civil rights movement. You and the other conservatives here will remind us every 5 minutes lest we forget.

But lets not fail to mention how the ideology has switched its loyalties to the right, and been embraced, especially lately, by the Trumpkins and their illustrious leader and namesake. Yes yes, I know that finally, under pressure and harsh media criticism he did eventually halfheartedly denounce them, but a late and lackluster denial it was. Add that to some of the people he is stacking his cabinet with and I would have to say it's not a good time to be a person of any color other than white.

The Democrats changed their views and beliefs over Decades ...

Republicans changed their views and beliefs from Tuesday November 8th to Wednesday November 9th ...

[Grizz]

I'm not going to marginalize or minimize Trump Supporters, I'm going to take them at their world and remind them at every opportunity what they were willing to "forgive" and "forget".

Trump Supporters say don't take Donald Trump Literally, but take him Seriously ...

Donald Trump said; Mexicans are Rapist and Murderers
Donald Trump said; Black People are Lazy
Donald Trump said; you can can just Grab their Puzzies
There are plenty more ... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-racist-examples_us_56d47177e4b03260bf777e83

So, which of these should I take Literally or Seriously?

I know for a fact that being an official of the Government, that having a Private Email Server is wrong and should be explained in the Court of Law.
So why should I "forgive" and "forget" what Donald Trump has "PUBLICLY" said in the court of Public opinion?

If Donald Trump constantly and publicly put down your ancestry, would you "forgive" and "forget" that and still Vote for him?

Well you appear to have all of the Talking points down, and of course you are required to use HuffPo as your source....
I fully understand that you are indoctrinated and incapable of separating fact from fiction so let's just say that voting for Trump was/is FAR better than voting for a murderous sociopath.

Clinton on Qaddafi: "We came, we saw, he died"
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/clinton-on-qaddafi-we-came-we-saw-he-died/

As she cackled for the camera. If that's how ANYONE feels about the death of another human being that is sick beyond the pale. You don't find the death of anyone, even your enemies funny.

[Chris]

Everybody knows the democrats were originally against the civil rights movement. You and the other conservatives here will remind us every 5 minutes lest we forget.

But lets not fail to mention how the ideology has switched its loyalties to the right, and been embraced, especially lately, by the Trumpkins and their illustrious leader and namesake. Yes yes, I know that finally, under pressure and harsh media criticism he did eventually halfheartedly denounce them, but a late and lackluster denial it was. Add that to some of the people he is stacking his cabinet with and I would have to say it's not a good time to be a person of any color other than white.


Hmm, history shows the South shifted to young Republicans who accepted civil rights.

Trump offers bigoted stereotypes, as Cigar just pointed out, but he's hardly a racist.

I just don't see what you're trying to say.

There was a black talking head on CNN trying to make your case last night. Asked for evidence he offered it's all this talk of law and order, you know what they means, controlling us! What?

Sorry, not buying it.

Clearly, Spencer and his whacky followers like Tila Tequila are racists, but they are outliers and hardly representative of anything mainstream.

[Crepitus]

False.

Fear profits a man nothing.

Where how and why is that false? Please be specific and provide examples.

[Chris]

Where how and why is that false? Please be specific and provide examples.

You mean the way you do not?

[Grizz]

I'm not going to marginalize or minimize Trump Supporters, I'm going to take them at their world and remind them at every opportunity what they were willing to "forgive" and "forget".

Trump Supporters say don't take Donald Trump Literally, but take him Seriously ...

Donald Trump said; Mexicans are Rapist and Murderers
Donald Trump said; Black People are Lazy
Donald Trump said; you can can just Grab their Puzzies
There are plenty more ... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-racist-examples_us_56d47177e4b03260bf777e83

So, which of these should I take Literally or Seriously?

I know for a fact that being an official of the Government, that having a Private Email Server is wrong and should be explained in the Court of Law.
So why should I "forgive" and "forget" what Donald Trump has "PUBLICLY" said in the court of Public opinion?

If Donald Trump constantly and publicly put down your ancestry, would you "forgive" and "forget" that and still Vote for him?
Good on you, you have all of the talking points down pat and you used the requisite lefty source.
But you see, voting for a murderous sociopath like Hillary is far worse.

[Crepitus]

Whites do not have all the advantages and the nation "WAS" set up for Christians.

What advantages do whites not get? Please be specific and provide examples.

As far as the nation being set up for christians, no. That is why the constitution itself avoids references to god.

[Crepitus]

You mean the way you do not?

Actually i did. It's blatantly obvious to anyone with eyes that congress is majority white male for example.

[Safety]

Everybody knows the democrats were originally against the civil rights movement. You and the other conservatives here will remind us every 5 minutes lest we forget.

But lets not fail to mention how the ideology has switched its loyalties to the right, and been embraced, especially lately, by the Trumpkins and their illustrious leader and namesake. Yes yes, I know that finally, under pressure and harsh media criticism he did eventually halfheartedly denounce them, but a late and lackluster denial it was. Add that to some of the people he is stacking his cabinet with and I would have to say it's not a good time to be a person of any color other than white.

Isn't it strange how the same people who see BLM as racist, can't see a movement that calls for "peaceful ethnic cleansing " as racist.

[Crepitus]

Isn't it strange how the same people who see BLM as racist, can't see a movement that calls for "peaceful ethnic cleansing " as racist.

Yes it is. But we both know why that is.......

[Standing Wolf]

I can't help but react that maybe the reflection of conservatism is not actually conservatism but the liberal view of conservatism.

That's certainly fair. Conservatives are certainly subject to being stereotyped and vilified for views they do not, in fact, hold, as are Liberals; we see it on this board every day of the week. As somebody who happens to hold personal views that fall into both camps - opinions that are traditionally associated with both the Conservative and Liberal perspectives - I find it pretty easy to spot those unfair charges, and to refrain from making them.

When I suggest that Conservatives and the more extremist White Nationalist groups hold views in common, I'm not saying that I think Conservatives are racists - only that the social views they espouse and support tend to be, in many cases, the same ones.


I keep trying to figure out exactly what conservatism, as I understand it, has to do with the racism of white nationalists like this small group following Spencer, which includes, for purposes of diversity, lol, Tila Tequila--and keep wondering why such a group is taken seriously at all.

Conservatives are frequently - unfairly, in my view - accused of racism because of the stances they take on such issues as illegal immigration and racial preferences. It's easier for their opponents on such issues to ignore the good arguments and supporting statistics and simply dismiss them as "racists". It's intellectual laziness at its most blatant.

On the other hand, a 2011 poll of registered Republicans in Mississippi revealed that 46% thought that interracial marriage should be illegal, so... No, I don't think the average Conservative is in line with that kind of thinking (broadly defined), but it's similar in a way to all Liberals being accused of holding some insane belief because some college students and faculty raised a stink about someone quoting Thomas Jefferson. We are none of us responsible for the mental cases and perpetually clueless folks with whom we share a label.

[Standing Wolf]

But when all that happened it was a movement lead by Democrats, right on up to Stromberg's filibuster of civil rights.

Southern Democrats...whose ideological kin - if you check the statistics on voter registration in those states - are now overwhelmingly Republican.

[Safety]

Yes it is. But we both know why that is.......

Yup. It's blatantly obvious.

[Safety]

Southern Democrats...whose ideological kin - if you check the statistics on voter registration in those states - are now overwhelmingly Republican.

Dixiecrat. An ideology which flourished during and post civil war.

[Standing Wolf]

The legislators who, as soon as those portions of the Voting Rights Act that prevented them from doing so were rescinded, began studying the habits of minority voters - what forms of ID they used, how many took advantage of same-day registration and similar programs - and then crafted and passed legislation that effectively prohibited those options...those guys were Republicans.

[Chris]

Southern Democrats...whose ideological kin - if you check the statistics on voter registration in those states - are now overwhelmingly Republican.

Those old Southern Democrats were voted out of office in favor of a new set of young Republicans who supported civil rights.

The only carry over was support for state's right, which of course liberals see as racist.

[Chris]

Actually i did. It's blatantly obvious to anyone with eyes that congress is majority white male for example.

And that makes Congress racist?

[Chris]

Isn't it strange how the same people who see BLM as racist, can't see a movement that calls for "peaceful ethnic cleansing " as racist.

Spencer and his kooks are racist.

BLM is not racist.

[Crepitus]

And that makes Congress racist?

Did I say that? Did I even imply that? No to both.

[Chris]

That's certainly fair. Conservatives are certainly subject to being stereotyped and vilified for views they do not, in fact, hold, as are Liberals; we see it on this board every day of the week. As somebody who happens to hold personal views that fall into both camps - opinions that are traditionally associated with both the Conservative and Liberal perspectives - I find it pretty easy to spot those unfair charges, and to refrain from making them.

When I suggest that Conservatives and the more extremist White Nationalist groups hold views in common, I'm not saying that I think Conservatives are racists - only that the social views they espouse and support tend to be, in many cases, the same ones.



Conservatives are frequently - unfairly, in my view - accused of racism because of the stances they take on such issues as illegal immigration and racial preferences. It's easier for their opponents on such issues to ignore the good arguments and supporting statistics and simply dismiss them as "racists". It's intellectual laziness at its most blatant.

On the other hand, a 2011 poll of registered Republicans in Mississippi revealed that 46% thought that interracial marriage should be illegal, so... No, I don't think the average Conservative is in line with that kind of thinking (broadly defined), but it's similar in a way to all Liberals being accused of holding some insane belief because some college students and faculty raised a stink about someone quoting Thomas Jefferson. We are none of us responsible for the mental cases and perpetually clueless folks with whom we share a label.



OK, here's something they might hold in common. Goldwater voted against the Civil Rights Act iirc because he believed the federal government had no right to intrude on the rights of private businessmen. That is perhaps shared though I haven't heard Spencer say anything like it. But Goldwater was not a racist the way Spencer is.

[Chris]

Did I say that? Did I even imply that? No to both.

Good. So you offer facts with no implications and generalizations with no facts.

[Safety]

Those old Southern Democrats were voted out of office in favor of a new set of young Republicans who supported civil rights.

The only carry over was support for state's right, which of course liberals see as racist.

That's probably because in another thread, it was concluded that "states rights" was a misnomer, therefore the argument that the civil war was fought over states rights is just a deflection away from the real reason, slavery. As such, those that use the argument of "states rights" in that application are probably rightfully labeled.

[Safety]

OK, here's something they might hold in common. Goldwater voted against the Civil Rights Act iirc because he believed the federal government had no right to intrude on the rights of private businessmen. That is perhaps shared though I haven't heard Spencer say anything like it. But Goldwater was not a racist the way Spencer is.

MLK jr. said that while Goldwater himself may not be racist, his ideology allowed racists to harbor shelter,

[decedent]

From what I've seen, white nationalism is when a bunch of white people try to make America great again by putting whites back in power. It seems that's what Trump's 100% team intends to do.

[Safety]

Spencer and his kooks are racist.

BLM is not racist.

We agree.

[Private Pickle]

Most of both houses are already white males.

If you think we need "white lives matter" you have completely missed the point.

The USA is the NAAWP. We have all the advantages, are the majority of the population, and get all the breaks. The whole nation is pretty much set up for us.

Except for the few specifically set up for minorities they are all United Caucasian College funds.
What breaks?

[Crepitus]

Good. So you offer facts with no implications and generalizations with no facts.

I'm saying white congress members don't need to organise into a white Congressmen's caucus because as the vast majority of them are white every caucus is a white Congressmen's caucus. That isn't racist it a fact. Can you really not see that?

[Cigar]

All this a BS at the end of the day ...

If they want an America to them selves, then Start with the South Side of Chicago or STFU

I ain't going nowhere ... so if they want me to move, then come move me.

[Standing Wolf]

Those old Southern Democrats were voted out of office in favor of a new set of young Republicans who supported civil rights.

You mean like the Mississippi Republicans in the poll I cited earlier? The same folks who supported the Dixiecrat politicians up until the '60s and the Kennedy-Johnson era began switching to the Republican Party at that time and never looked back - and they certainly didn't do so because the "young Republicans" they supported espoused a different mindset than they had before they, themselves, switched party affiliation. The office holders of both parties in those states "supported civil rights" because, between the federal courts, the National Guard and the F.B.I., they had no choice.

The only carry over was support for state's right, which of course liberals see as racist.

Careful about that stereotyping, Chris. Do "liberals" see the idea of states' rights as "racist" when it comes to drug legalization? Assisted suicide? When Conservatives attempt to pressure states and local jurisdictions into enforcing certain federal laws, isn't that ultimately a "states' rights" issue?

[Crepitus]

What breaks?

Jobs, schooling, other opportunities like internships? All kinda prejudiced in the direction of white males.

[Private Pickle]

Jobs, schooling, other opportunities like internships? All kinda prejudiced in the direction of white males.

Everyone gets those benefits and if anything it's skewed towards diversity...not towards white supremacy...

[Safety]

What breaks?

Consideration before lethal force is used by police, for one.

[Private Pickle]

Consideration before lethal force is used by police, for one.
Not so much given more whites are killed by police than any other minority group.

[Safety]

Jobs, schooling, other opportunities like internships? All kinda prejudiced in the direction of white males.

Privilege would probably be understood better.

[Captain Obvious]

White nationalism is a label that the idiot partisan hack left likes to project.

You know, I'm realizing more and more what a waste of time this forum is because it's over-ran with trolls, hacks and idiots.

The world is dumber because of it.

[Chris]

You mean like the Mississippi Republicans in the poll I cited earlier? The same folks who supported the Dixiecrat politicians up until the '60s and the Kennedy-Johnson era began switching to the Republican Party at that time and never looked back - and they certainly didn't do so because the "young Republicans" they supported espoused a different mindset than they had before they, themselves, switched party affiliation. The office holders of both parties in those states "supported civil rights" because, between the federal courts, the National Guard and the F.B.I., they had no choice.


Careful about that stereotyping, Chris. Do "liberals" see the idea of states' rights as "racist" when it comes to drug legalization? Assisted suicide? When Conservatives attempt to pressure states and local jurisdictions into enforcing certain federal laws, isn't that ultimately a "states' rights" issue?



Wasn't the poll of Mississippians and not politicians?

Southerners switched to young Republicans who supported civil rights and state's rights, as opposed to the old Democrats who were against civil rights.

In this context I think many if not most liberals see state's rights as racist. It's like the black guy on CNN last night when asked for an example of racism cited law and order as an obvious case. Law and order?

I think people have been scare sh***less by liberals demonizing.

[Safety]

Not so much given more whites are killed by police than any other minority group.

Rate vs total, just like when calculating welfare stats...more white people receive welfare, but the argument always goes to population size, no?

[Crepitus]

Everyone gets those benefits and if anything it's skewed towards diversity...not towards white supremacy...

http://money.cnn.com/2015/11/25/news/economy/racial-discrimination-work/

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/mar/15/jalen-ross/black-name-resume-50-percent-less-likely-get-respo/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.revealnews.org/article/when-companies-hire-temp-workers-by-race-black-applicants-lose-out/amp/?client=ms-android-att-us

Just not true, no matter how often you Republican talking heads say it.

[resister]

Thanks for the response folks.I'm proud to be American and white, so I guess that makes me a "white nationalist"But I don't cotton to racism at all.

[Safety]

White nationalism is a label that the idiot partisan hack left likes to project.

You know, I'm realizing more and more what a waste of time this forum is because it's over-ran with trolls, hacks and idiots.

The world is dumber because of it.

Why do you continue to participate in something that causes you so much grief? I'm not saying I want you to leave, just curious.

[Private Pickle]

Rate vs total, just like when calculating welfare stats...more white people receive welfare, but the argument always goes to population size, no?
Well...not when considering which "lives matter". It certainly isn't an indication that whites have the benefit of not being killed by the police.

[Safety]

http://money.cnn.com/2015/11/25/news/economy/racial-discrimination-work/

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/mar/15/jalen-ross/black-name-resume-50-percent-less-likely-get-respo/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.revealnews.org/article/when-companies-hire-temp-workers-by-race-black-applicants-lose-out/amp/?client=ms-android-att-us

Just not true, no matter how often you Republican talking heads say it.

He's not Republican, you should use conservative.

[Chris]

All this a BS at the end of the day ...

If they want an America to them selves, then Start with the South Side of Chicago or STFU

I ain't going nowhere ... so if they want me to move, then come move me.



"All this a BS at the end of the day ... " is just BS.


But I still content Reps and Dems are fighting and blinded by old fights when the political landscape has just shifted under them both, almost to the point of reversing positions.

[Safety]

Well...not when considering which "lives matter". It certainly isn't an indication that whites have the benefit of not being killed by the police.

Right, so the calculation of stats should vary, depending on the bias one wants to influence on the outcome.

[Private Pickle]

http://money.cnn.com/2015/11/25/news/economy/racial-discrimination-work/

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/mar/15/jalen-ross/black-name-resume-50-percent-less-likely-get-respo/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.revealnews.org/article/when-companies-hire-temp-workers-by-race-black-applicants-lose-out/amp/?client=ms-android-att-us

Just not true, no matter how often you Republican talking heads say it.

So your articles really don't speak to any benefits white's get. Thinks like AA, low interest loans, government recognition as a protected class, etc.

[Mister D]

I can't help but react that maybe the reflection of conservatism is not actually conservatism but the liberal view of conservatism. I keep trying to figure out exactly what conservatism, as I understand it, has to do with the racism of white nationalists like this small group following Spencer, which includes, for purposes of diversity, lol, Tila Tequila--and keep wondering why such a group is taken seriously at all.
It's an utterly mistaken concept of conservatism at least as far as the US is concerned. White supremacy has not served the interests of liberal capitalism for generations now. It has been discarded by virtually everyone who counts on the American right.

[Private Pickle]

Right, so the calculation of stats should vary, depending on the bias one wants to influence on the outcome.

What you are failing to realize is that you are indeed playing with the stats dependent on your bias and the outcome you want...

[Mister D]

White nationalism - like black nationalism, and all other forms of race-based nationalism - is what happens when ignorant people confuse the melanin content of their skin with the moral content of their heritage.

Indeed, the idea that your ancestors did things you are proud of because the width of their nose or their average height is clearly stupid, and yet some take skin colour seriously.

It is plainly absurd. Why should an Irishman under British rule be proud of "white men," when it was white men who suppressed them and enslaved them, based on their perceived inferiority?

The most important takeaway from the modern racial egalitarianism movement is that while there are differences between the average black and the average white, the scope of these differences is actually less than the differences observed within each racial group.

To conclude, race-based nationalism is at the heart of racism itself, and must never be condoned. This is why I am opposed to things like Black History Month, or affirmative action - they judge the worthiness of interest by the colour of skin rather than the content of character. Meanwhile guys like Benjamin Banneker are interesting, smart and successful enough to warrant study any day of the year. In fact, pride in his accomplishments makes more sense than taking pride in some white guy with lesser accomplishments, merely on the grounds that he is white.

This is precisely why I do not use the term. It doesn't matter what I say. You have your own definition and insist on it.

[Cigar]

Thanks for the response folks.I'm proud to be American and white, so I guess that makes me a "white nationalist"But I don't cotton to racism at all.

Because you had a choice ... right? :laugh:

[Standing Wolf]

In this context I think many if not most liberals see state's rights as racist.

I don't know about racist, but to me it's wrong when a state attempts to place limits on the Constitutional rights of a citizen, but equally wrong when the federal government attempts to impose something like a prohibition on marijuana use on the states. In my view, it's all situational; sometimes the feds are in the right, but certainly not always.


It's like the black guy on CNN last night when asked for an example of racism cited law and order as an obvious case. Law and order?

Agreed, that's ridiculous.

[Safety]

What you are failing to realize is that you are indeed playing with the stats dependent on your bias and the outcome you want...

Show me where I have done that. I have never made the argument that whites are more on welfare because I understand that hard times can affect anyone regardless of melanin content.

Back up your accusation of my bias.

[Cigar]

http://i35.tinypic.com/2z5t8k7.jpg

[Cigar]

Show me where I have done that. I have never made the argument that whites are more on welfare because I understand that hard times can affect anyone regardless of melanin content.

Back up your accusation of my bias.

Come-On, if Welfare was just for Black People, it wouldn't exist :laugh:

[Private Pickle]

Privilege would probably be understood better.


Rate vs total, just like when calculating welfare stats...more white people receive welfare, but the argument always goes to population size, no?

Here you go.

[Safety]

So your articles really don't speak to any benefits white's get. Thinks like AA, low interest loans, government recognition as a protected class, etc.

You are conflating benefits with equal opportunity. The majority of government contracts are served by white males, there is no policy to replace white males as bidders on government contracts. This country is comprised of more than white males, so the government, which represents all citizens, enacted a policy that gave a shot to handicapped, disabled veterans, white women, blacks and Hispanics. The hyperbole you seek may work to get some people rilled up, but people are starting to know better.

[Private Pickle]

You are conflating benefits with equal opportunity. The majority of government contracts are served by white males, there is no policy to replace white males as bidders on government contracts. This country is comprised of more than white males, so the government, which represents all citizens, enacted a policy that gave a shot to handicapped, disabled veterans, white women, blacks and Hispanics. The hyperbole you seek may work to get some people rilled up, but people are starting to know better.

Hyperbole? Are those not benefits not awarded to white males? That to me is racism...not hyperbole...

[exploited]

This is precisely why I do not use the term. It doesn't matter what I say. You have your own definition and insist on it.

Feel free to provide your own definition.

The thing is that no matter how you define it, taking pride in your skin colour is wholly irrational.

Now, if you'd like to discuss real nationalism, or perhaps cultural pride, I have no objections.

[Safety]

Here you go.

...once again, using an argument as an example, is not the same as making the argument. In fact, you know very well I was making the point about using total vs rate, so I have no clue as to where you are trying to go.

[Mister D]

Feel free to provide your own definition.

The thing is that no matter how you define it, taking pride in your skin colour is wholly irrational.

Now, if you'd like to discuss real nationalism, or perhaps cultural pride, I have no objections.
See, you're doing it again. You approach the term with your own assumptions and preconceptions. Sorry, you can keep it.

[Chris]

This is precisely why I do not use the term. It doesn't matter what I say. You have your own definition and insist on it.

The idea that nationalism is about skin color and that makes it absurd is in itself absurd. To me any serious advocacy of it is cultural as is, imo, BLM or the new policies of segregation on campuses. The Nordic nations are turning conservative because immigrants are Muslims so much as they are strangers who don't share the same trusted values and views. It's just not about color.

[exploited]

See, you're doing it again. You approach the term with your own assumptions and preconceptions. Sorry, you can keep it.

Just say what you mean or don't bother posting dude. I'm not gonna beg for your opinion.

White nationalism refers to skin colour. Taking pride in skin colour is stupid. Pride in culture and values is not. So either don't use the term white nationalism, or explain why you take pride in your skin colour.

[Private Pickle]

...once again, using an argument as an example, is not the same as making the argument. In fact, you know very well I was making the point about using total vs rate, so I have no clue as to where you are trying to go.

You were trying to make a point of total vs. rate but it bit you in the ass. The truth is as you have no clue where to go from here.

[Mister D]

Just say what you mean or don't bother posting dude. I'm not gonna beg for your opinion.

White nationalism refers to skin colour. Taking pride in skin colour is stupid. Pride in culture and values is not. So either don't use the term white nationalism, or explain why you take pride in your skin colour.

I gave you my opinion. You never responded. Anyway, you're doing it again. Yes, "white nationalism" as you define it seems kinda silly. Have at it.

[exploited]

The idea that nationalism is about skin color and that makes it absurd is in itself absurd. To me any serious advocacy of it is cultural as is, imo, BLM or the new policies of segregation on campuses. The Nordic nations are turning conservative because immigrants are Muslims so much as they are strangers who don't share the same trusted values and views. It's just not about color.

They should probably describe themselves as Norwegian nationalists rather than white nationalists then. Duh.

[exploited]

I gave you my opinion. You never responded. Anyway, you're doing it again. Yes, "white nationalism" as you define it seems kinda silly. Have at it.

Okay, so you don't take pride in the colour of your skin, but nonetheless demand that it be the single identifying factor of your nationalism.

Totally illogical. Just spit it out already.

[Mister D]

Okay, so you don't take pride in the colour of your skin, but nonetheless demand that it be the single identifying factor of your nationalism.

Totally illogical. Just spit it out already.
Yes, that would be totally illogical. Now we just have to find anyone who fits this mold.

[Mister D]

They should probably describe themselves as Norwegian nationalists rather than white nationalists then. Duh.
You appear to be doing most of the describing. lol

[Mister D]

The idea that nationalism is about skin color and that makes it absurd is in itself absurd. To me any serious advocacy of it is cultural as is, imo, BLM or the new policies of segregation on campuses. The Nordic nations are turning conservative because immigrants are Muslims so much as they are strangers who don't share the same trusted values and views. It's just not about color.
Exactly.

[Safety]

Hyperbole? Are those not benefits not awarded to white males? That to me is racism...not hyperbole...

You are entitled to your opinion, I don't agree with it.

Government programs are not implemented to eradicate the white male, although reading posts here and places like stormfront, you would think otherwise. No, they were implemented to right generations of wrongs. If there were never any government policies in place that barred people of color from participating as a whole, then you might have a point. But seeing how no race is outright barred from government contracts, it's a moot point.

[exploited]

Yes, that would be totally illogical. Now we just have to find anyone who fits this mold.

No point to this discussion. You are arguing in bad faith. White nationalism refers to skin colour, clearly, the same as black nationalism.

If you don't want to be associated with people who take pride in their skin colour, don't call yourself a white nationalist.

This is very basic. Perhaps you take pride in your Irish ancestors and support their social, religious and political values, and feel like a unique people. This would make you an Irish nationalist. Perhaps you are Norwegian and want to defend your values - that would make you a Norwegian nationalist. Or you could go larger and take pride in European accomplishments - this would make you not a nationalist in any sense of the word, unless you want to argue that the EU is heading in the right direction and the European people share the same values.

[Mister D]

No point to this discussion.

Right! You are set on a definition of "white nationalism" that is largely of your own making.

[Safety]

You were trying to make a point of total vs. rate but it bit you in the ass. The truth is as you have no clue where to go from here.

And I've made my point. In fact, my point was so apropos it not only highlighted your hypocrisy, but also brought your bias to the forefront. Face it, you want to use whatever metric that presents whites in the positive.

[exploited]

Right! You are set on a definition of "white nationalism" that is largely of your own making.

The white in white nationalism refers to what?

[Cigar]

Toni Morrison: Fear of losing white privilege led to Trump's election.
“The comfort of being ‘naturally better than’ is hard to give up.”

Toni Morrison has written a powerful essay in the aftermath of Donald Trump’s election as president of the United States, and it gets right to the heart of why Trump won.

In a piece titled “Mourning For Whiteness” from the November 21 print issue of the New Yorker (published online Monday), the Pulitzer Prize-winning novelist argues that Trump won due to the terror of privileged white men in the face of a rapidly diversifying country.

“Under slave laws, the necessity for color rankings was obvious, but in America today, post-civil-rights legislation, white people’s conviction of their natural superiority is being lost,” Morrison writes.

“There are ‘people of color’ everywhere, threatening to erase this long-understood definition of America. And what then? Another black President? A predominantly black Senate? Three black Supreme Court Justices? The threat is frightening.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/toni-morrison-fear-of-losing-white-privilege-led-to-trumps-election_us_58330ee2e4b058ce7aac0964


Something Amazing happens when everyone starts from the same Block ..... :grin:

https://theathleticperspective.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/r-track-meet-large570.jpg (http://www.forthebrokenhearted.net/126244640?pagenum=3)

[Private Pickle]

You are entitled to your opinion, I don't agree with it.

Government programs are not implemented to eradicate the white male, although reading posts here and places like stormfront, you would think otherwise. No, they were implemented to right generations of wrongs. If there were never any government policies in place that barred people of color from participating as a whole, then you might have a point. But seeing how no race is outright barred from government contracts, it's a moot point.

Right generations of wrongs by committing more wrongs? Yeah the government is really a beacon of light with regards to righting wrongs. Regardless, we aren't talking about eradicating anything. You inserted that and moved the goal posts. We are talking about the benefits one receives for being a white male. There are none.

If you give better pricing to a minority group than you do to a majority group you're really not being inclusive with regards to government contracts.

[Mister D]

The white in white nationalism refers to what?
Race.

[Safety]

Come-On, if Welfare was just for Black People, it wouldn't exist :laugh:

They tried to call it reparations, but I just couldn't understand why so many white people in Kentucky was receiving reparations....

[exploited]

Race.

The white race. Which is defined by what? The colour of their skin perhaps?

[Mister D]

They tried to call it reparations, bug I just couldn't understand why so many white people in Kentucky was receiving reparations....

You suck. It was funny watching him try to get involved. Black solidarity, I guess. :laugh:

[Mister D]

The white race. Which is defined by what? The colour of their skin perhaps?
Ah...now find me one "white nationalist" who equates race with skin color like you do. Just one.

[Safety]

Right generations of wrongs by committing more wrongs? Yeah the government is really a beacon of light with regards to righting wrongs. Regardless, we aren't talking about eradicating anything. You inserted that and moved the goal posts. We are talking about the benefits one receives for being a white male. There are none.

If you give better pricing to a minority group than you do to a majority group you're really not being inclusive with regards to government contracts.

That's not how .gov contracting works.

[Cigar]

Race.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/54/6a/80/546a8058958f4231971cd4822cc46d02.jpg (https://www.pinterest.com/explore/albinism/)

[Safety]

You suck. It was funny watching him try to get involved. Black solidarity, I guess. :laugh:

Bros before hoes.

[Private Pickle]

And I've made my point. In fact, my point was so apropos it not only highlighted your hypocrisy, but also brought your bias to the forefront. Face it, you want to use whatever metric that presents whites in the positive.

I'm the one arguing that whites don't get benefits...that isn't positive in my opinion but believe whatever you want. Typical that because I don't agree with me you play the race card but disguise it as "bias". Typical victim mentality and part of the problem we are facing in this country today.

And they wonder why so many disenfranchised white people turned out to vote...

[Private Pickle]

That's not how .gov contracting works.

Interesting. Do you realize there are millions upon millions of dollars worth of contracts that only minority owned businesses can bid on?

[Captain Obvious]

Why do you continue to participate in something that causes you so much grief? I'm not saying I want you to leave, just curious.

Some here are pretty sharp and insightful, there are tidbits of brilliance here and there in a sea of idiocy.

Fucking with hacktards was fun but it gets old after a while and you mods have been getting all nurse rachet lately.

[Grizz]

Actually I think a baseline is needed before it can truly be discussed.
Is "Racism" a subjective, or an objective issue?

[Chris]

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/54/6a/80/546a8058958f4231971cd4822cc46d02.jpg (https://www.pinterest.com/explore/albinism/)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Tyg5SJDpiQ

[Safety]

Interesting. Do you realize there are millions upon millions of dollars worth of contracts that only minority owned businesses can bid on?


FEBRUARY 07, 2012 Federal law mandates that the government allocate 23 percent of its contracting work to small businesses. Of this portion, 5 percent is meant for businesses with economically or socially disadvantaged owners. These are essentially minority-owned businesses.


Eligibility
Certain groups are presumed to be socially disadvantaged. African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Pacific Americans, Native Americans and Subcontinent Asian Americans are part of that group. Other individuals can obtain certification if they show that they are disadvantaged because of race, ethnicity, gender, physical handicap or residence in an environment isolated from the mainstream of American society.

https://www.americanexpress.com/us/small-business/openforum/articles/government-contracting-for-small-and-minority-owned-businesses/


5%.

[exploited]

Ah...now find me one "white nationalist" who equates race with skin color like you do. Just one.
Oh, so what do they equate race with? Apparently when they talk about being proud of being white, they aren't referring to their skin colour, they are referring to some other white characteristic of their race. Which characteristic?

[Mister D]

Oh, so what do they equate race with?
It's irrelevant. All we needed to determine was that "white nationalists" do not share your understanding of race. Now are you beginning to see why your definition is deeply flawed?

[Safety]

I'm the one arguing that whites don't get benefits...that isn't positive in my opinion but believe whatever you want. Typical that because I don't agree with me you play the race card but disguise it as "bias". Typical victim mentality and part of the problem we are facing in this country today.

And they wonder why so many disenfranchised white people turned out to vote...

This is the actual conversation....


What breaks?


Consideration before lethal force is used by police, for one.


Not so much given more whites are killed by police than any other minority group.


Rate vs total, just like when calculating welfare stats...more white people receive welfare, but the argument always goes to population size, no?

[Mister D]

Oh, so what do they equate race with? Apparently when they talk about being proud of being white, they aren't referring to their skin colour, they are referring to some other white characteristic of their race. Which characteristic?
Again, who are these white nationalists that equate race and skin color?

[exploited]

It's irrelevant. All we needed to determine was that "white nationalists" do not share your understanding of race. Now are you beginning to see why your definition is deeply flawed?
It isn't irrelevant at all. It is clearly at the core of the argument.

You seem to be claiming that when white nationalists say they are proud of being white, they are referring to some other white characteristic of their race. What is it? Perhaps the colour of their eyeballs, or the plaque on their tongues?

[resister]

Why do you insist being proud of your race is somehow racist?Denieing your heritage is insulting to your anscetors

[Mister D]

It isn't irrelevant at all. It is clearly at the core of the argument.

You seem to be claiming that when white nationalists say they are proud of being white, they are referring to some other white characteristic of their race. What is it? Perhaps the colour of their eyeballs, or the plaque on their tongues?
Again, who are these white nationalists that equate race with skin color? Who are they? Who shares this understanding of race with you?

[exploited]

Again, who are these white nationalists that equate race with skin color? Who are they? Who shares this understanding of race with you?
Anyone who uses the term "white nationalism" to describe themselves. Clearly. If you are not referring to skin colour when you say white nationalist, what are you referring too?

Perhaps it is European values. But there are people of all races who support European values. Are they white nationalists? Why or why not?

[Grizz]

Again, who are these white nationalists that equate race and skin color?

While I have no knowledge of exploited, I have a long association with Leftists of varying stripes, one thing is common with most of them....you will not get a straight answer. That's why I always try and establish a baseline before the discussion begins.

[Mister D]

Anyone who uses the term "white nationalism." Clearly. If you are not referring to skin colour when you say white nationalist, what are you referring too?

Perhaps it is European values. But there are blacks and Asians who support European values. Can they be white nationalists, like literally-brain-damaged Tila Tequila?
I don't know of any "white nationalist" who equates race with skin color. Again, do these people exist? Who are they?

Exploited, not a single white nationalist shares your understanding of race.

[Captain Obvious]

Repackaged white guilt basically

[exploited]

I don't know of any "white nationalist" who equates race with skin color. Again, do these people exist? Who are they?

Exploited, not a single white nationalist shares your understanding of race.
You won't answer the question because your argument is literally nonsensical.

I have no problem with people taking pride in their cultural heritage. None at all. But to define it on the basis of "white" is rank stupidity. Plain and simple. Either it is stupid because you don't actually mean "white" when you say "white nationalism," or it is stupid because you do mean "white" when you say "white nationalism."

Either stop using the term, or stop getting uppity when people point out that taking pride in the colour of your skin is stupid.

[Mister D]

While I have no knowledge of exploited, I have a long association with Leftists of varying stripes, one thing is common with most of them....you will not get a straight answer. That's why I always try and establish a baseline before the discussion begins.
You touched on the real crux here. Obviously, it's a question of what race means. To a white nationalist, exploited has a very superficial understanding of the concept.

[exploited]

You touched on the real crux here. Obviously, it's a question of what race means. To a white nationalist, exploited has a very superficial understanding of the concept.
So you are a Caucasian nationalist, perhaps?

[Mister D]

You won't answer the question because your argument is literally nonsensical.

I have no problem with people taking pride in their cultural heritage. None at all. But to define it on the basis of "white" is rank stupidity. Plain and simple. Either it is stupid because you don't actually mean "white" when you say "white nationalism," or it is stupid because you do mean "white" when you say "white nationalism."

Plain and simple.

Either stop using the term, or stop getting uppity when people point out that taking pride in the colour of your skin is stupid.
Now we just have to find out who takes pride in their skin color. We'll bash 'em real good!

[Private Pickle]

https://www.americanexpress.com/us/small-business/openforum/articles/government-contracting-for-small-and-minority-owned-businesses/


5%.
So 5% of the government contracts are handed out based on race or some other qualifying attribute that leaves out white males. Got it. Was that supposed to be a rebuttal?

[Mister D]

So you are a Caucasian nationalist, perhaps?
No but I'm sure you'll come up with a novel definition of that too.

[exploited]

No but I'm sure you'll come up with a novel definition of that too.
You understand that you are being completely irrational, correct?

Again, what does the "white" in "white nationalist" refer too?

You have said a race, but have also argued that race is not defined by skin colour, while also insisting that I am wrong to say that "white nationalism" is for people with white skin. If you don't mean the colour of the skin, what are you referring to when you say white?

Whatever that thing is, put it in front of nationalism, and I have no objections. But it is simple nonsense to say that "white nationalism" doesn't refer to white skin. If that was a case, any black person could be a white nationalist.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqUA-vRcwRM

[Cigar]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Tyg5SJDpiQ

Well if it's all about Skin Color, then that argument can be defeated also :laugh:

[Cigar]

So you are a Caucasian nationalist, perhaps?

More like a Back-Woods-Crackcasian :laugh:

[Mister D]

You understand that you are being completely irrational, correct?

Again, what does the "white" in "white nationalist" refer too?

You have said a race, but have also argued that race is not defined by skin colour, while also insisting that I am wrong to say that "white nationalism" is for people with white skin. If you don't mean the colour of the skin, what are you referring to when you say white?

I wonder how many times we'll do this dance...

White refers to race. Again, I don't know of any white nationalist that equates skin color with race.

And round and round we go!

Oh, and you're lying. See bold.

[Grizz]

You touched on the real crux here. Obviously, it's a question of what race means. To a white nationalist, exploited has a very superficial understanding of the concept.
If I say ni**ers can't come in here, that's racist.
If I say Hispanics must come here legally it is not racist ,but a Lefty will call you one nonetheless.

[Mister D]

If I say ni**ers can't come in here, that's racist.
If I say Hispanics must come here legally it is not racist ,but a Lefty will call you one nonetheless.
I could say I don't like black beans and they'll call it a "dog whistle".

[Cigar]

If I say ni**ers can't come in here, that's racist.
If I say Hispanics must come here legally it is not racist ,but a Lefty will call you one nonetheless.

If it's said on the internet, nothing happens :laugh:

[exploited]

I wonder how many times we'll do this dance...

White refers to race. Again, I don't know of any white nationalist that equates skin color with race.

And round and round we go!

Oh, and you're lying. See bold.

My God.

So when white nationalists talk about being white nationalists, they are not referring to a nation of people who have white skin?

Yes, of course they are. Which is why it is called white nationalism.

You take pride in your race. That is utterly hilarious and silly. Personally, I take pride in having blue eyes. Do you know how many great things people with blue eyes have done? My wife is a double-joint nationalist as well ;)

[Private Pickle]

This is the actual conversation....

I know that you want to play with the numbers. The conversation will go something like this:

You - More minorities are killed by police per capita.
Me- More minorities commit crimes per capita.
You - Because of whites.

Rinse and repeat.

[Chris]

Well if it's all about Skin Color, then that argument can be defeated also :laugh:

It's not but to some.

[Cigar]

I could say I don't like black beans and they'll call it a "dog whistle".

If I like Gram Crackers over Ritz Crackers, does that make me Racist?

[stjames1_53]

If I like Gram Crackers over Ritz Crackers, does that make me Racist?

can you ask the same question of me and NOT say I'm racist based on my choice? I've said this before, and I'll say it again. YOU are a stamp racist.

[Mister D]

My God.

So when people say "white nationalists" they are not referring to a race of people who have white skin?
Sigh...I'll break out the crayons.

Yes, white people will have white skin, exploited. Following so far? Great. White nationalists do reduce race to skin color. Do you seriously still not get this?

[Don]

Those old Southern Democrats were voted out of office in favor of a new set of young Republicans who supported civil rights.

The only carry over was support for state's right, which of course liberals see as racist. That is unless they think it works for them. Legalizing marijuana even though it breaks federal law. Sanctuary cities or counties or states.

[exploited]

Sigh...I'll break out the crayons.

Yes, white people will have white skin, exploited. Following so far? Great. White nationalists do reduce race to skin color. Do you seriously still not get this?
Let me break out the crayons for you:

If you don't mean "white skin" when you refer to "white nationalism," stop using that idiotic term. There are plenty of people who do not have white skin who are either Caucasians, or of European descent.

Unless of course you take pride in your skin colour, in which case the only appropriate response is to laugh at you.

[Mister D]

Let me break out the crayons for you:

If you don't mean "white skin" when you refer to "white nationalism," stop using that idiotic term. There are plenty of people who do not have white skin who are either Caucasians, or of European descent.
Jesus...

First of all, I don't use the fucking term! :laugh:

One more try...is European or Caucasian descent merely a matter of skin color? Do you get it now?

[Crepitus]

So your articles really don't speak to any benefits white's get. Thinks like AA, low interest loans, government recognition as a protected class, etc.

Think about those things for a minute. If there was no bias towards whites we wouldn't need those things to ensure that black people got fair treatment. The very fact that those things exist is the proof you aren't seeing.

[Chris]

Touchy topic but discuss it and not members.

[Cigar]

can you ask the same question of me and NOT say I'm racist based on my choice? I've said this before, and I'll say it again. YOU are a stamp racist.

You're hurting my feelings ... stop it :laugh:

[Cigar]

Look at the Bright side fellas ... by 2040 there will be no Majorities and we'll all be dead and gone.

Maybe we can bring this subject back up, in Hell :grin:

We'll All be the Dark Skinned Guys arguing about who get's to sit by the Window.

[exploited]

Jesus...

First of all, I don't use the $#@!ing term! :laugh:

One more try...is European or Caucasian descent merely a matter of skin color? Do you get it now?
If it is not merely a matter of skin colour, why define it by skin colour? Again, what does the "white" in "white nationalism" refer too?

Do you get it now?

It is a stupid term that you have spent pages defending for no good reason. Just say "European nationalism" or something similar. You know, something that is actually related to the nationalist concepts you hold, which apparently has nothing to do with skin colour?

[Safety]

So 5% of the government contracts are handed out based on race or some other qualifying attribute that leaves out white males. Got it. Was that supposed to be a rebuttal?

Actually, if you read the part that I highlighted, it clearly states "Other individuals can obtain certification if they show that they are disadvantaged because of race, ethnicity, gender, physical handicap or residence in an environment isolated from the mainstream of American society." Where does it say whites can't be considered? Guess what, it doesn't.

[Safety]

I know that you want to play with the numbers. The conversation will go something like this:

You - More minorities are killed by police per capita.
Me- More minorities commit crimes per capita.
You - Because of whites.

Rinse and repeat.

Actually, it goes like this:

PP: whites don't receive more welfare than blacks if you take into account their population size
Me: but why do you say whites are killed more than blacks if it isn't true based upon their population size?
PP: Whatever, blame YT! It's all YT's fault!

[Private Pickle]

Think about those things for a minute. If there was no bias towards whites we wouldn't need those things to ensure that black people got fair treatment. The very fact that those things exist is the proof you aren't seeing.
I never claimed bias towards minorities didn't exist. My point is that you don't fight bias or racism with bias or racism.

[Mister D]

If it is not merely a matter of skin colour, why define it by skin colour? Again, what does the "white" in "white nationalism" refer too?

Do you get it now?

It is a stupid term that you have spent pages defending for no good reason. Just say "European nationalism" or something similar. You know, something that is actually related to the nationalist concepts you hold?

The argument that "white nationalism" has nothing to do with "white skin" is completely nonsensical. Period. If you want to associate with such people, that is on you. Not me.

Good question but it's a question for you not for "white nationalists". Why define it by skin color? Why do you do that? Third time: it refers to race. Not going for a 4th.

I haven't defended anything. I'll let you know when I do. Better still, "white nationalism hasn't been attacked. Only a straw man. I'm not a straw man nationalist either. :wink:

You really have a bad habit of..well lying. No one said white nationalism has nothing to do with white skin. You've been told that white skin and "white race" are not equated in the minds of white nationalists. IOW, race is not merely skin color. It refers to a matrix of differences and traits. How many different ways does that need to be be explained to you? Now you disagree with white nationalists with regard to race? Good for you but that's not relevant. The point is that not a single white nationalist shares your understanding of race. Not one. Zip. Zilch. Zero.

Your definition is entirely worthless in so far as it's merely a polemic.

[donttread]

Most of both houses are already white males.

If you think we need "white lives matter" you have completely missed the point.

The USA is the NAAWP. We have all the advantages, are the majority of the population, and get all the breaks. The whole nation is pretty much set up for us.

Except for the few specifically set up for minorities they are all United Caucasian College funds.

Disagree. white males are pretty much the only remaining people who are fair game for discrimination. But we can take it.
BTW, who do you think averages more government aid for college, whites or blacks? The nation is "set up for us " because we don't hide behind a blame card. What about the Asians and now the hispanics who have out competed blacks socio-economically, as has every single immigrant group to come to America? Keep handing them that blame card and supporting prohibition and you'll keep blacks right where the dems needs them to be.

[nic34]

But when all that happened it was a movement lead by Democrats, right on up to Stromberg's filibuster of civil rights.

....and republicans used to be the party of such progressives as McKinley, Roosevelt and Taft......

[Cigar]

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/f2/91/76/f29176c1c55d18f053a223f729a89e0e.jpg (https://www.pinterest.com/gracemciver/polar-bears/)

[exploited]

Good question but it's a question for you not for "white nationalists". Why define it by skin color? Why do you do that? Third time: it refers to race. Not going for a 4th.

I haven't defended anything. I'll let you know when I do. Better still, "white nationalism hasn't been attacked. Only a straw man. I'm not a straw man nationalist either. :wink:

You really have a bad habit of..well lying. No one said white nationalism has nothing to do with white skin. You've been told that white skin and "white race" are not equated in the minds of white nationalists. IOW, race is not merely skin color. It refers to a matrix of differences and traits. How many different ways does that need to be be explained to you? Now you disagree with white nationalists with regard to race? Good for you but that's not relevant. The point is that not a single white nationalist shares your understanding of race. Not one. Zip. Zilch. Zero.

Your definition is entirely worthless in so far as it's merely a polemic.
Okay, so what race are you referring too when you talk about "white nationalism?" You have said "the white race," but have also said that we can't equivocate "white skin" and "white race." Do you mean Caucasians, who are all or most of the population in Europe, North America, the Horn of Africa, Western Asian, Central Asia and South Asia?

Further, what other differences and traits are you talking about? Average nose size? Average height? Perhaps people who suck at jumping? Cultural attributes?

I've never seen a person jump through so many illogical hoops before. Not good, Mister D. You're much smarter than this claptrap.

[Private Pickle]

Actually, if you read the part that I highlighted, it clearly states "Other individuals can obtain certification if they show that they are disadvantaged because of race, ethnicity, gender, physical handicap or residence in an environment isolated from the mainstream of American society." Where does it say whites can't be considered? Guess what, it doesn't.

They have minority owned businesses that get access to both contracts only intended for those businesses and lower interest rates. They have women owned, tribal owned, etc. all that have access to business that standard businesses owned by white males who are not handicapped don't.

You can't be white an own a minority owned business and thereby receive those benefits.

[Safety]

Think about those things for a minute. If there was no bias towards whites we wouldn't need those things to ensure that black people got fair treatment. The very fact that those things exist is the proof you aren't seeing.

It is what it is.

[Safety]

Disagree. white males are pretty much the only remaining people who are fair game for discrimination. But we can take it.
BTW, who do you think averages more government aid for college, whites or blacks? The nation is "set up for us " because we don't hide behind a blame card. What about the Asians and now the hispanics who have out competed blacks socio-economically, as has every single immigrant group to come to America? Keep handing them that blame card and supporting prohibition and you'll keep blacks right where the dems needs them to be.

If you ever had a doubt what white nationalism is, here is a good example.

[Mister D]

If you ever had a doubt what white nationalism is, here is a good example.
I have a lot of doubts. This isn't helping.

[Private Pickle]

Actually, it goes like this:

PP: whites don't receive more welfare than blacks if you take into account their population size
Me: but why do you say whites are killed more than blacks if it isn't true based upon their population size?
PP: Whatever, blame YT! It's all YT's fault!

What's YT? Anyway, I never claimed the things you say I claim about welfare. But you want to play with the numbers again. You stated that whites have the benefit of not being shot by cops as recklessly or carelessly than minorities. You haven't back up your claim in any way. I simply said it doesn't make sense since more whites are killed than minorities. Then you went to per capita and as a result I pointed out that per capita minorities commit more crime than whites which, is why they are killed more...per capita.

[Safety]

They have minority owned businesses that get access to both contracts only intended for those businesses and lower interest rates. They have women owned, tribal owned, etc. all that have access to business that standard businesses owned by white males who are not handicapped don't.

You can't be white an own a minority owned business and thereby receive those benefits.

Still, the white male is not excluded if he can prove he is disenfranchised, regardless how much you want to believe otherwise.

[Mister D]

Oh, and whites don't receive more welfare than blacks either proportionately or absolutely unless you include SS and Medicare as "welfare".

[Private Pickle]

Still, the white male is not excluded if he can prove he is disenfranchised, regardless how much you want to believe otherwise.
I am a white male and I am excluded from all minority based contracts. And even so I have to prove I'm "disenfranchised" where someone else just has to show up and the color of their skin or their gender is all they have to provide.

To me that is the definition of racism and sexism but because it is against white males it seems to be OK.

[Safety]

What's YT? Anyway, I never claimed the things you say I claim about welfare. But you want to play with the numbers again. You stated that whites have the benefit of not being shot by cops as recklessly or carelessly than minorities. You haven't back up your claim in any way. I simply said it doesn't make sense since more whites are killed than minorities. Then you went to per capita and as a result I pointed out that per capita minorities commit more crime than whites which, is why they are killed more...per capita.

Yes, it doesn't make sense to you, because you don't choose to see it without a bias filter. You said more whites are killed than blacks, I said more blacks are killed per capita, the same per capita metric used in every other stat WN's use to paint blacks as being criminal.

[Private Pickle]

Yes, it doesn't make sense to you, because you don't choose to see it without a bias filter. You said more whites are killed than blacks, I said more blacks are killed per capita, the same per capita metric used in every other stat WN's use to paint blacks as being criminal.

They are killed more per capita because they commit more crime per capita.

Rinse and repeat.

[Safety]

I am a white male and I am excluded from all minority based contracts. And even so I have to prove I'm "disenfranchised" where someone else just has to show up and the color of their skin or their gender is all they have to provide.

To me that is the definition of racism and sexism but because it is against white males it seems to be OK.

But you fail to see the inverse of the 95% of contracts that you can be "eligible" for. Does privilege mean you have to have a monopoly on 100%?

[Safety]

They are killed more per capita because they commit more crime per capita.

Rinse and repeat.

Well, at least you finally agree they are killed more than whites. It's a start.

[Common Sense]

It's so hard being white for some...it's a real burden.

[Private Pickle]

But you fail to see the inverse of the 95% of contracts that you can be "eligible" for. Does privilege mean you have to have a monopoly on 100%?

As if the other 95% of the contracts are not available to minority owned businesses, etc.? It's not like 95% of Federal contracts go to old white Republicans. The discussion needs to stop being about privilege and be more about fair trade. It is already illegal to discriminate... Why does 5% need to be set aside if the laws are working as intended?

[Private Pickle]

Well, at least you finally agree they are killed more than whites. It's a start.
But....they aren't...

[Private Pickle]

It's so hard being white for some...it's a real burden.

Maybe...maybe not...but let's double down and at least try to make it hard to be white. Then we can all be equal...

[Safety]

Oh, and whites don't receive more welfare than blacks either proportionately or absolutely unless you include SS and Medicare as "welfare".


Nationally, most of the people who receive benefits from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program are white. According to 2013 data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which administers the program, 40.2 percent of SNAP recipients are white, 25.7 percent are black, 10.3 percent are Hispanic, 2.1 percent are Asian and 1.2 percent are Native American.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/28/food-stamp-demographics_n_6771938.html

[Mister D]

Okay, so what race are you referring too when you talk about "white nationalism?" You have said "the white race," but have also said that we can't equivocate "white skin" and "white race." Do you mean Caucasians, who are all or most of the population in Europe, North America, the Horn of Africa, Western Asian, Central Asia and South Asia?

Further, what other differences and traits are you talking about? Average nose size? Average height? Perhaps people who suck at jumping? Cultural attributes?

I've never seen a person jump through so many illogical hoops before. Not good, D. You're much smarter than this claptrap.
Sigh...

2nd time: I don't use the term "white nationalism". You're better off asking a white nationalist what he means but my guess is he means persons of European extraction.

I'm not and it's irrelevant. You're just trying to obfuscate now. If you don't believe in the biological concept of race that's fine but you won't be using that as a way out. I'm slamming that door in your face. lol

Sadly, you don't appear to be. You're just regurgitating the propaganda you've been spoon fed.

[Chris]

It's so hard being white for some...it's a real burden.

https://i.snag.gy/cfbaN3.jpg

The British John Bull and the American Uncle Sam bear The White Man's Burden (Apologies to Rudyard Kipling), taking the coloured peoples of the world to civilisation. (Judge magazine, 1 April 1899)

[Safety]

As if the other 95% of the contracts are not available to minority owned businesses, etc.? It's not like 95% of Federal contracts go to old white Republicans. The discussion needs to stop being about privilege and be more about fair trade. It is already illegal to discriminate... Why does 5% need to be set aside if the laws are working as intended?

Because we are a nation of people with diverse backgrounds, because based strictly off of comments on forums like this one, there are extreme cases of bias towards people of color, because of those biases, people of color can be discriminated against when applying for a contract, so the government set aside a portion to compensate for people who wants the south to rise again.

[Safety]

But....they aren't...

Per capita.

[Mister D]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/28/food-stamp-demographics_n_6771938.html
That's nice. Was there a point to this?

[Mister D]

It's so hard being white for some...it's a real burden.
You need some new lines.

[Safety]

It's so hard being white for some...it's a real burden.

It's really confusing, first they (WN) want to ride the coattails of someone from generations past just because they share the same melanin content of their skin, but then they don't like the special privilege of that melanin content and complain about how oppressed they are.

Strange bunch.

[Mister D]

It's really confusing, first they (WN) want to ride the coattails of someone from generations past just because they share the same melanin content of their skin, but then they don't like the special privilege of that melanin content and complain about how oppressed they are.

Strange bunch.
Very strange. Can't wait to meet one.

[Safety]

That's nice. Was there a point to this?

Well, you said "Oh, and whites don't receive more welfare than blacks either proportionately or absolutely unless you include SS and Medicare as "welfare"." so I figured I'll be your Huckleberry.

[Safety]

Very strange. Can't wait to meet one.

LoL, they must be like Bush supporters, can't find one....

[Mister D]

LoL.
Now you're stealing Common Sense's lines. He doesn't have that many.

[Safety]

Now you're stealing Common Sense's lines. He doesn't have that many.

:tongue:

[Mister D]

Well, you said "Oh, and whites don't receive more welfare than blacks either proportionately or absolutely unless you include SS and Medicare as "welfare"." so I figured I'll be your Huckleberry.
What I said is true. You do realize welfare covers a lot more than SNAP, right? Seriously, you guys make me feel like a fucking genius sometimes.

[exploited]

Sigh...

2nd time: I don't use the term "white nationalism". You're better off asking a white nationalist what he means but my guess is he means persons of European extraction.

I'm not and it's irrelevant. You're just trying to obfuscate now. If you don't believe in the biological concept of race that's fine but you won't be using that as a way out. I'm slamming that door in your face. lol

Sadly, you don't appear to be. You're just regurgitating the propaganda you've been spoon fed.
Not sure what propaganda you are referring too. Perhaps I should review my statements:

1. Taking pride in your skin colour is stupid.
2. Using the term "white nationalism" is stupid because it refers to either white skin or "the white race," but both Caucasian people (the biological race) can have non-white skin, and Europeans can have non-white skin. So unless you are referring to "white skin," you shouldn't use "white nationalism." And if you ARE referring to white skin when you say "white nationalism," and consider yourself a white nationalist, you're dumb.

That is the totality of my points so far. What do you disagree with?

My honest inclination is that you briefly read my post, got mad about something in it that you assumed applied to you, for whatever reason, and took immediately to arguing in bad faith.

[Chris]

Last warning to discuss topic and not members.

[Mister D]

Not sure what propaganda you are referring too. Perhaps I should review my statements:

1. Taking pride in your skin colour is stupid.
2. Using the term "white nationalism" is stupid because it refers to white skin, but both Caucasian people (the biological race) can have non-white skin, and Europeans can have non-white skin. So unless you are referring to "white skin," you shouldn't use "white nationalism." And if you ARE referring to white skin when you say "white nationalism," and consider yourself a white nationalist, you're dumb.

That is the totality of my points so far. What do you disagree with?

My honest inclination is that you briefly read my post, got mad about something in it that you assumed applied to you, for whatever reason, and took immediately to arguing in bad faith.

1. Great. Who you're addressing remains a mystery.
2. Then stop using the term that way. No white nationalist does.

You're hung up on your own conception of race and project it on white nationalists. That's been the problem from square 1. We're both wasting our time here.

[Private Pickle]

Because we are a nation of people with diverse backgrounds, because based strictly off of comments on forums like this one, there are extreme cases of bias towards people of color, because of those biases, people of color can be discriminated against when applying for a contract, so the government set aside a portion to compensate for people who wants the south to rise again.

Discrimination is already illegal. Seems to me we shouldn't be combating bias or discrimination with bias or discrimination rather enforcing the laws we have on the books. I don't want the south to rise again but apparently the government needs to compensate for me as well...

[Private Pickle]

Per capita.

Which is a statistic. When you look at actual lives...white's lose more...

[The Xl]

I'm sure white nationalism means different things to different people, whether it's those who identify with it, or people on the outside looking in. Some may see it as straight up racism, with the intent to hurt other people, others may see it as white people who wish to peaceful self segregate, others maybe identify it culturally, and while the name white implies race, it's more a values thing.

I do think there is an uptick in white people that want to preserve what is perceived to be their culture, and wish to associate with likeminded people. I don't necessarily think they have an issue with minorities that identify culturally with them.

[exploited]

1. Great. Who you're addressing remains a mystery.
2. Then stop using the term that way. No white nationalist does.

You're hung up on your own conception of race and project it on white nationalists. That's been the problem from square 1. We're both wasting our time here.
I've asked you, what, ten times now to define race? To explain yourself? But you won't.

I wonder why that is?

[exploited]

I'm sure white nationalism means different things to different people, whether it's those who identify with it, or people on the outside looking in. Some may see it as straight up racism, with the intent to hurt other people, others may see it as white people who wish to peaceful self segregate, others maybe identify it culturally, and while the name white implies race, it's more a values thing.
I do think there is an uptick in white people that want to preserve what is perceived to be their culture, and wish to associate with likeminded people. I don't necessarily think they have an issue with minorities that identify culturally with them.

Those white people who want to preserve their cultural values ought to be cautious not to identify as "white nationalists." There are much better terms that actually describe their beliefs. White nationalism, if they don't care about skin colour, quite clearly does not describe anything about what they believe. The values of egalitarianism, liberty and rationality have not been exclusively "white" values for a long, long time.

[Ethereal]

It's a form of nationalism whose identity is centered on the "white race", however we're defining that.

The problem with nationalists, as I see it, is that they tend to want to gobble up as much territory as possible and to dominate it with their ideology.

This applies to US nationalists just as much as it does to white nationalists or even black nationalists for that matter.

"Nations", insofar as they can be defined meaningfully, tend to be much smaller and more intimate than the super-states which characterize the modern international order.

For example, the Kurds in Syria subscribe to a system of democratic confederalism where the municipality is the largest coherent polity within the context of their ideology.

If we had a similar system in the USA, cities like LA, Chicago, and New York, among others, would be like their own countries. And to the extent they had shared interests with other municipalities and counties, that would be governed by voluntary confederation as opposed to coercive unionism.

[Mister D]

I've asked you, what, ten times now to define race? To explain yourself? But you won't.

I wonder why that is?
You've asked me once. Just now, actually. Again, I'm not the topic. Your critique of white nationalism is the topic and you simply refuse to deal with white nationalists on their own terms. You tell them what they think and then attack them for it. What's the point? Who are you trying to convince? Yourself?

[Mister D]

Those white people who want to preserve their cultural values ought to be cautious not to identify as "white nationalists." There are much better terms that actually describe their beliefs. White nationalism, if they don't care about skin colour, quite clearly does not describe anything about what they believe. The values of egalitarianism, liberty and rationality have not been exclusively "white" values for a long, long time.
Puhleeese. It doesn't matter what they call themselves. You'll attack whatever term they settle on.

[Cigar]

Well, you said "Oh, and whites don't receive more welfare than blacks either proportionately or absolutely unless you include SS and Medicare as "welfare"." so I figured I'll be your Huckleberry.

They've been on TV all week ... Denial can be convenient at times

[The Xl]

Those white people who want to preserve their cultural values ought to be cautious not to identify as "white nationalists." There are much better terms that actually describe their beliefs. White nationalism, if they don't care about skin colour, quite clearly does not describe anything about what they believe. The values of egalitarianism, liberty and rationality have not been exclusively "white" values for a long, long time.

I'd guess those types who identify as white nationalists do so, because in their opinion, the vast majority of those who have those specific values happen to be white.

[Cigar]

A Real White Nationalists would have nothing to do with Black Friday :grin:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/7d/08/14/7d08145e0d317d2d32f31bb843ca76e4.jpg (https://www.pinterest.com/pin/373658100307974914/)

[nic34]

https://i.snag.gy/cfbaN3.jpg

The British John Bull and the American Uncle Sam bear The White Man's Burden (Apologies to Rudyard Kipling), taking the coloured peoples of the world to civilisation. (Judge magazine, 1 April 1899)

Whether they like it or not...

[resister]

A Real White Nationalists would have nothing to do with Black Friday :grin:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/7d/08/14/7d08145e0d317d2d32f31bb843ca76e4.jpg (https://www.pinterest.com/pin/373658100307974914/)
I'm damn sure staying away from stores

[exploited]

Puhleeese. It doesn't matter what they call themselves. You'll attack whatever term they settle on.
Not at all. As I have said at least three times, if you want to talk about cultural heritage, that is fine. If you want to talk about nationalism associated with a unique historical group, such as being Norwegian or Irish or whatever, again, fine. I don't care about that at all.

But talking about "white skin" and how people with white skin have certain unique values is, of course, absurd. Your skin colour does not determine your cultural or philosophical identity. Furthermore, talking about the "white race" is another meaningless term, because there are plenty of caucasians who are not white. Similarly, there are plenty of Europeans who aren't white.

What you are trying to do is make this about the white race, and apparently not white skin, without actually bothering to explain what the white race is, what common values it has, or who it is composed of. You have also not addressed very clear questions, such as "Is it possible for a black man to be a white nationalist, under your definition of the term?"

I'm more than interested in having an honest discussion about this topic. So far, I haven't seen that desire reciprocated.

exploited


TBed for ignoring warnings not to talk about members.

[Chris]

Whether they like it or not...

And therein, I believe, lies the problem. Some acting superior to others and insisting on helping them become civilized.

[Chris]

A Real White Nationalists would have nothing to do with Black Friday :grin:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/7d/08/14/7d08145e0d317d2d32f31bb843ca76e4.jpg (https://www.pinterest.com/pin/373658100307974914/)



How do Black nationalists feel about White Christmas Sales?

[Chris]

It's a form of nationalism whose identity is centered on the "white race", however we're defining that.

The problem with nationalists, as I see it, is that they tend to want to gobble up as much territory as possible and to dominate it with their ideology.

This applies to US nationalists just as much as it does to white nationalists or even black nationalists for that matter.

"Nations", insofar as they can be defined meaningfully, tend to be much smaller and more intimate than the super-states which characterize the modern international order.

For example, the Kurds in Syria subscribe to a system of democratic confederalism where the municipality is the largest coherent polity within the context of their ideology.

If we had a similar system in the USA, cities like LA, Chicago, and New York, among others, would be like their own countries. And to the extent they had shared interests with other municipalities and counties, that would be governed by voluntary confederation as opposed to coercive unionism.



It is odd that so many focus on color or whatever and don't blink an eye at the notion of nationalism.

[Mark III]

I've asked you, what, ten times now to define race? To explain yourself? But you won't.

I wonder why that is?

He talks in riddles constantly. It is better to pay him no attention. As far as I can see that is the way most people handle it.


TBed for ignoring warnings not to talk about members.

[Captain Obvious]

lawlz

[Captain Obvious]

BLM = black nationalism

[del]

lawlz

[Safety]

BLM = black nationalism

Lulz

[Crepitus]

I never claimed bias towards minorities didn't exist. My point is that you don't fight bias or racism with bias or racism.

I didn't expect you to see the point.

[Crepitus]

Disagree. white males are pretty much the only remaining people who are fair game for discrimination. But we can take it.
BTW, who do you think averages more government aid for college, whites or blacks? The nation is "set up for us " because we don't hide behind a blame card. What about the Asians and now the hispanics who have out competed blacks socio-economically, as has every single immigrant group to come to America? Keep handing them that blame card and supporting prohibition and you'll keep blacks right where the dems needs them to be.

I have been a white male for almost 50 years and have never been discriminated against.

Whites I would imagine received more college aid than anyone else simply because there are more of us.

[Chris]

BLM = black nationalism

Is BLM a statement of preference or of superiority? I see it as blacks uniting for equal treatment. I don't like their militancy that sometimes shuts down the equal right to speech as others, but otherwise see nothing wrong.

[The Xl]

BLM is a dumb movement that has likely been co-opted and comprised. Can't really call it either racist or not racist as the membership seems to be all over the place.

[jimmyz]

"What is White nationalism?"

A counter to the Alt. Left movement.

[Chris]

BLM is a dumb movement that has likely been co-opted and comprised. Can't really call it either racist or not racist as the membership seems to be all over the place.

It is interesting that while it claims to be grassroots it has a lot of spokespeople. Is it like the Tea Parties were, grassroots but hijacked by politicians and disparaged by the media?

[del]

I can't help but react that maybe the reflection of conservatism is not actually conservatism but the liberal view of conservatism. I keep trying to figure out exactly what conservatism, as I understand it, has to do with the racism of white nationalists like this small group following Spencer, which includes, for purposes of diversity, lol, Tila Tequila--and keep wondering why such a group is taken seriously at all.

lol

apologists

you gotta love em

[Chris]

Conservatism as a political ideology is not responsible for the words and actions of White supremacists, and Conservatives should not have to apologize for them in any way. On the other hand, it's clearly in error to label White supremacists "of the left", when the social and political views of Conservatism are mirrored almost exactly in those groups' agendas. Liberals, too, have their odd cousins and funny uncles, which Conservatives are forever, unfairly, tossing up in their faces. Both sides must recognize that, while we don't have to explain or justify certain groups and individuals, it's delusional to pretend that their views are not 90% in alignment with our own.


I can't help but react that maybe the reflection of conservatism is not actually conservatism but the liberal view of conservatism. I keep trying to figure out exactly what conservatism, as I understand it, has to do with the racism of white nationalists like this small group following Spencer, which includes, for purposes of diversity, lol, Tila Tequila--and keep wondering why such a group is taken seriously at all.


That's certainly fair. Conservatives are certainly subject to being stereotyped and vilified for views they do not, in fact, hold, as are Liberals; we see it on this board every day of the week. As somebody who happens to hold personal views that fall into both camps - opinions that are traditionally associated with both the Conservative and Liberal perspectives - I find it pretty easy to spot those unfair charges, and to refrain from making them.

When I suggest that Conservatives and the more extremist White Nationalist groups hold views in common, I'm not saying that I think Conservatives are racists - only that the social views they espouse and support tend to be, in many cases, the same ones.



Conservatives are frequently - unfairly, in my view - accused of racism because of the stances they take on such issues as illegal immigration and racial preferences. It's easier for their opponents on such issues to ignore the good arguments and supporting statistics and simply dismiss them as "racists". It's intellectual laziness at its most blatant.

On the other hand, a 2011 poll of registered Republicans in Mississippi revealed that 46% thought that interracial marriage should be illegal, so... No, I don't think the average Conservative is in line with that kind of thinking (broadly defined), but it's similar in a way to all Liberals being accused of holding some insane belief because some college students and faculty raised a stink about someone quoting Thomas Jefferson. We are none of us responsible for the mental cases and perpetually clueless folks with whom we share a label.


Those old Southern Democrats were voted out of office in favor of a new set of young Republicans who supported civil rights.

The only carry over was support for state's right, which of course liberals see as racist.


OK, here's something they might hold in common. Goldwater voted against the Civil Rights Act iirc because he believed the federal government had no right to intrude on the rights of private businessmen. That is perhaps shared though I haven't heard Spencer say anything like it. But Goldwater was not a racist the way Spencer is.


You mean like the Mississippi Republicans in the poll I cited earlier? The same folks who supported the Dixiecrat politicians up until the '60s and the Kennedy-Johnson era began switching to the Republican Party at that time and never looked back - and they certainly didn't do so because the "young Republicans" they supported espoused a different mindset than they had before they, themselves, switched party affiliation. The office holders of both parties in those states "supported civil rights" because, between the federal courts, the National Guard and the F.B.I., they had no choice.


Careful about that stereotyping, Chris. Do "liberals" see the idea of states' rights as "racist" when it comes to drug legalization? Assisted suicide? When Conservatives attempt to pressure states and local jurisdictions into enforcing certain federal laws, isn't that ultimately a "states' rights" issue?


Wasn't the poll of Mississippians and not politicians?

Southerners switched to young Republicans who supported civil rights and state's rights, as opposed to the old Democrats who were against civil rights.

In this context I think many if not most liberals see state's rights as racist. It's like the black guy on CNN last night when asked for an example of racism cited law and order as an obvious case. Law and order?

I think people have been scare sh***less by liberals demonizing.


lol

apologists

you gotta love em


That was part of a larger discuss, del.

I couldn't find you discussing anything.

[Private Pickle]

I didn't expect you to see the point.
Is this "bad faith posting"? Perhaps an attack on a poster rather than the topic? The mod team has seemed to have stepped it up since recent reductions in their ranks. I'll ask.

[Captain Obvious]

Is BLM a statement of preference or of superiority? I see it as blacks uniting for equal treatment. I don't like their militancy that sometimes shuts down the equal right to speech as others, but otherwise see nothing wrong.

You answered your question.

On paper they're a rights activism organization. In practice they're racial terrorists.

[Private Pickle]

Per capita.

So just wondering. Even though I've specifically stated that more black lives are lost....per capita...than whites, does that make a difference to you? Does it not matter how many black lives vs. white lives vs. minority lives have been lost to a militarized police force? I mean when we look at the real issues that face black Americans today doesn't it directly involve white Americans? There have been multiple examples of the same type of abuse of force from the police on whites as there has been on blacks yet you think there is some kind of "White male conspiracy" that has, on it's agenda, more black deaths than white.
Well I'm here to tell you...as a corporate white American I have no agenda with regards to whom I hire. But now that I know there is a conspiracy!!!! Well....

[Crepitus]

Is this "bad faith posting"? Perhaps an attack on a poster rather than the topic? The mod team has seemed to have stepped it up since recent reductions in their ranks. I'll ask.

If you feel that was bad faith posting all I can say is the report button is at the bottom of the post.

[resister]

So just wondering. Even though I've specifically stated that more black lives are lost....per capita...than whites, does that make a difference to you? Does it not matter how many black lives vs. white lives vs. minority lives have been lost to a militarized police force? I mean when we look at the real issues that face black Americans today doesn't it directly involve white Americans? There have been multiple examples of the same type of abuse of force from the police on whites as there has been on blacks yet you think there is some kind of "White male conspiracy" that has, on it's agenda, more black deaths than white.
Well I'm here to tell you...as a corporate white American I have no agenda with regards to whom I hire. But now that I know there is a conspiracy!!!! Well....If racism disappeared, many would not a clue what to do in there spare time

[Private Pickle]

If you feel that was bad faith posting all I can say is the report button is at the bottom of the post.
Naturally. Because you have no argument otherwise.

[Mister D]

If racism disappeared, many would not a clue what to do in there spare time

Hardly! They'd just redefine it to suit it any situation. Or just make shit up. Been paying attention?

[Dr. Who]

I keep hearing this term"White nationalism"Is this a bad thing?If it means you are proud to be "White"and proud of your nation, so be it, sign me up.Never apologize for being white...or black for that matter.On a side note, why have I never heard of "Black nationalism"?Is that bad also?

In answer to your question, please read this link: http://www.whitenationalism.com/wn/wn-06.htm

[resister]

In answer to your question, please read this link: http://www.whitenationalism.com/wn/wn-06.htmSo white nationalist want to move to an island or start racial genocide?

[Mister D]

In answer to your question, please read this link: http://www.whitenationalism.com/wn/wn-06.htm

What is this and where is it from?

[Mister D]

So white nationalist want to move to an island or start racial genocide?
Some guy on the Internet said so!

[resister]

In answer to your question, please read this link: http://www.whitenationalism.com/wn/wn-06.htm
Where on earth did you find that racist diatribe?

[Dr. Who]

What is this and where is it from?

From the website known as White Nationalism.com. It pretty much squares with that fellow Spencer's views.

However if you prefer, here is the Wiki def: White nationalism is an ideology (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideology) that advocates a racial (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racialism_(Racial_categorization)) definition of national identity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_identity).[1] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_nationalism#cite_note-1) Proponents of the ideology identify with and are attached to the concept of a white nation.[2] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_nationalism#cite_note-2) It ranges from a preference for one's specific white ethnic group, to feelings of superiority, including calls for national citizenship to be reserved for white people (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_people).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_nationalism

If you don't like that one, here's another: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/white nationalist

[resister]

From the website known as White Nationalism.com. It pretty much squares with that fellow Spencer's views.

However if you prefer, here is the Wiki def: White nationalism is an ideology (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideology) that advocates a racial (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racialism_(Racial_categorization)) definition of national identity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_identity).[1] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_nationalism#cite_note-1) Proponents of the ideology identify with and are attached to the concept of a white nation.[2] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_nationalism#cite_note-2) It ranges from a preference for one's specific white ethnic group, to feelings of superiority, including calls for national citizenship to be reserved for white people (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_people).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_nationalism

If you don't like that one, here's another: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/white nationalist
Oh, gosh i'm so ashamed to be white.I already have 68 tattoos,now I have to go get tatted black all over.So you find a link dragging whites thru the mud,by way of quoting radicals, your point?

[Dr. Who]

Where on earth did you find that racist diatribe?

That's what "white nationalism" means. Literally making a white nation or a state or states in America that are exclusively white. It's fairly implicit in the term. Perhaps a state called Europa or Caucasia.

[Mister D]

From the website known as White Nationalism.com. It pretty much squares with that fellow Spencer's views.

However if you prefer, here is the Wiki def: White nationalism is an ideology (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideology) that advocates a racial (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racialism_(Racial_categorization)) definition of national identity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_identity).[1] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_nationalism#cite_note-1) Proponents of the ideology identify with and are attached to the concept of a white nation.[2] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_nationalism#cite_note-2) It ranges from a preference for one's specific white ethnic group, to feelings of superiority, including calls for national citizenship to be reserved for white people (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_people).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_nationalism

If you don't like that one, here's another: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/white nationalist

OK then. "White nationalism" as thus defined isn't even as marginal as women's golf. Why are we talking about it?

[del]

yes, merriam webster is a hotbed of radicalism

[Dr. Who]

Oh, gosh i'm so ashamed to be white.I already have 68 tattoos,now I have to go get tatted black all over.So you find a link dragging whites thru the mud,by way of quoting radicals, your point?

Wikipedia is radical or Webster's dictionary?

[Mister D]

Wikipedia is radical or Webster's dictionary?

Wikipedia is as radical as the people writing the articles. Most of them are written and edited by ideologically driven people when it comes to controversial topics. Surely that wasn't a serious question.

[Dr. Who]

OK then. "White nationalism" as thus defined isn't even as marginal as women's golf. Why are we talking about it?
Apparently it's becoming more popular by the minute given the proliferation of all manner of alt-right web sites. I was just answering the OP's question regarding the definition. That is the popular definition.

[Crepitus]

What is this and where is it from?

Some twisted semi-religious nut job site. I ahve my doubts whether it actually represents any actual group or organisation.

[resister]

Wikipedia is radical or Webster's dictionary?
The marginal group they described is.Also,wiki , is known to be biased

[Chris]

From the website known as White Nationalism.com. It pretty much squares with that fellow Spencer's views.

However if you prefer, here is the Wiki def: White nationalism is an ideology (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideology) that advocates a racial (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racialism_(Racial_categorization)) definition of national identity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_identity).[1] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_nationalism#cite_note-1) Proponents of the ideology identify with and are attached to the concept of a white nation.[2] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_nationalism#cite_note-2) It ranges from a preference for one's specific white ethnic group, to feelings of superiority, including calls for national citizenship to be reserved for white people (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_people).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_nationalism

If you don't like that one, here's another: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/white nationalist

Two interesting points there, relative to earlier "discussion."

One is that even extremists and Wikipedia all seem to agree that white nationalism has to do with ethnic preference or superiority.

Two is your link to white people is also defined ethnically, broadly European. The whole notion of white pertaining to skin color is something that predates ethnic definitions: " The term "white race" or "white people" entered the major European languages in the later 17th century, in the context of racialized slavery and unequal status in European colonies. Description of populations as "white" in reference to their skin color predates this notion and is found in Greco-Roman ethnography and other ancient sources. Scholarship on race generally distinguishes the modern concept from pre-modern descriptions of collective difference."

The previous argument for that was bogus.

[Mister D]

Some twisted semi-religious nut job site. I ahve my doubts whether it actually represents any actual group or organisation.

You would be smart to do so. sadly, I can't say that for our more credulous members.

[resister]

Some twisted semi-religious nut job site. I ahve my doubts whether it actually represents any actual group or organisation.I must concur

[Dr. Who]

Wikipedia is as radical as the people writing the articles. Most of them are written and edited by ideologically driven people when it comes to controversial topics. Surely that wasn't a serious question.

And Webster's too? Please. You may have your own definition, but it doesn't jibe with the outspoken white nationalists out there who want their own euro white space so that they can go back to just marginalizing poor white people who will accept their serfdom quietly and not rock the boat.

[Mister D]

And Webster's too? Please. You may have your own definition, but it doesn't jibe with the outspoken white nationalists out there who want their own euro white space so that they can go back to just marginalizing poor white people who will accept their serfdom quietly and not rock the boat.
Like I said, "white nationalism" thus defined is extremely marginal. Why are we talking about it?

[Dr. Who]

Two interesting points there, relative to earlier "discussion."

One is that even extremists and Wikipedia all seem to agree that white nationalism has to do with ethnic preference or superiority.

Two is your link to white people is also defined ethnically, broadly European. The whole notion of white pertaining to skin color is something that predates ethnic definitions: " The term "white race" or "white people" entered the major European languages in the later 17th century, in the context of racialized slavery and unequal status in European colonies. Description of populations as "white" in reference to their skin color predates this notion and is found in Greco-Roman ethnography and other ancient sources. Scholarship on race generally distinguishes the modern concept from pre-modern descriptions of collective difference."

The previous argument for that was bogus.
The fact that they include the word white in their definition creates a racial focus i.e. literally white nation.

[Mister D]

Well that's a colorful response, if bereft of any cogent argument.

Again, "alt-right" ( a term you are not the least bit familiar with) or "white nationalism" thus defined is about as marginal as Canada i geopolitics. Why are we talking about it?