CDZ White Nationalism vrs White Supremacy vrs White Separatism vrs Alt-Right

Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by JimBowie1958, Aug 16, 2017.

  1. JimBowie1958
    Offline

    JimBowie1958 Old Fogey

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Messages:
    47,526
    Thanks Received:
    7,199
    Trophy Points:
    1,870
    Location:
    Fredericksburg, VA
    Ratings:
    +31,286
    OK, this is a complex subject that the main stream media, dominated by leftwing ideologues, simply does not care enough to bother with. To them, if you dare defend white culture or white interests you are a racist and a white supremacist by definition.

    But for people who prefer to define movements by what their proponents define themselves as, rather than some Chick Tract author, and use primary sources themselves, one finds a different array of perspectives, most of which I disagree with, but anyway....

    Main stream thinking says....
    white nationalism is a term for a form of white supremacy or separatism.
    Its supporters defend "country by white racial identity." They promote the interests of whites exclusively and denigrate all others....

    Mark Potok, senior fellow at the Southern Poverty Law Center, said the term white nationalism means white domination. It isn't necessarily an endorsement of a 100% pure white society, a goal now regarded by the far right as unrealistic, he said.

    "White nationalism is more the idea that whites should dominate," he said, that the culture should dominate and policies that jibe with the idea should be supported, such as opposing nonwhite immigration.

    White nationalists believe the country "should be built by and for white people." They "tend to be less about ethnic slurs, less about Nazi slurs, tend to speak more academic language."

    Some people who embrace the white nationalist identity refer to themselves as "race realists" -- generally speaking, that means people who believe the races can't live together. ...

    Paul Gottfried is the former Horace Raffensperger professor of humanities at Elizabethtown College in Pennsylvania. He is also the president of the H.L. Mencken Club, which calls itself a "society for the independent right."
    He said "white nationalism is more often used by the left than on the alternative right" and that "white Identitarian" and "race realist" are the terms more common on the alt-right​

    Another main stream voice gives us this:
    White supremacy is the broad racist ideology that believes the white race is “inherently superior” and should control those of other races, according to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary.​


    So by the definition of people in the Alt-right world, White Nationalism doe not equate to White Supremacy because they do not want to control other races but are OK with dominating them through sheer numbers in a democratic process, one guesses.

    White Nationalists are not necessarily anti-semitic,though many of them are.

    Here are quotes by some White Nationalists on what they consider their movement to be.

    19. Q. Do White Nationalists think of Adolph Hitler or National Socialism as a model to emulate?

    A. White Nationalists do not seek to recreate the German experience of 1936-1945. Hitler's Reich is not a model for White Nationalism. White Nationalism is defensive. It is not externally aggressive. It would most likely be a government of very limited powers, with a federal structure that assures localities considerable latitude to experiment with moral and social laws, with the idea of fostering traditional communities and traditional religions in places where the overwhelming majority of people want such things - and secularism where the majority wish to have that as well.

    However, within the ranks of White Nationalists, there are some significant differences of opinion about the _historical_ significance of Hitler, and whether he was a help or a hindrance to the cause of White survival. Also, there are those who argue that Hitler's military exploits were a defensive reaction to the ethnically motivated slaughters by (predominantly jewish) Marxists in Russia. This debate among White Nationalists can get emotional at times, but has little to do with the practicality of White survival or the probable characteristics of any new White Nation today.

    20. Q. Are White Nationalists anti-semitic?

    A. That depends on what you mean by "anti-semitic". Most White Nationalists believe that Jews are not monolithic in their views and should not be viewed as a racial or ethnic enemy. However, the activities of Jewish organizations are another matter entirely. From Jewish organized and financed bolshevism, to the Frankfurt School and the AJC, various Jewish financed and managed "civil rights" organizations such as the the NAACP, various Jewish pro-immigration groups, the ADL with its vicious anti-white "hate crime" laws, to AIPAC and the various Jewish Neo-Con think tanks advocating pre-emptive wars, collective guilt and the slaughter of civilians - the activities of organized Jewish political groups are the primary cause of all the political and policy ills of which White Nationalists complain. Because of this, most White Nationalists feel that there is no way out of the ugliness and injustice of multi-culturalism except through vigorous opposition to organized Jewish political groups and their agendas. Indeed, White survival depends on successfully countering the power and influence of organized Jewish groups.

    21. Q. What is the difference between political conservatism and White Nationalism?

    A. Surprisingly little. White Nationalists generally diagnose the problems of the United States in exactly the same way as do most paleo-conservatives. Indeed Thomas Sowell's treatise on the universality of racial strife worldwide and the tendency of governments worldwide to aggravate that strife are the factual raw material for the White Nationalist argument.

    Conservatives generally believe that different races can live peacefully in a single country as long as the government has limited powers and serves as a "loose confederation" guaranteeing individual rights. White Nationalists are very sympathetic to this conservative viewpoint.

    However, White Nationalists will point out that there is no existing example of such a loose confederation in which racial autonomy and peace has been achieved, nor is there any reason to believe that a government (such as the United States Government) which starts out as a loose confederation with limited powers will remain so for long if subjected to the competing demands of different races.

    White Nationalists believe that the urge to use governmental power to gain racial advantage is so great that the safest and most humane choice is to break up multi-racial empires and place each race under a separate government. In broad outline, Russia is headed in the right direction in preventing ethnic conflict by allowing different races their own separate governments.

    Conservatives assume liberals are motivated by good intentions, and that the destructiveness of their policies should be forgiven. White nationalists believe that liberals are motivated by a lust for power and carefully cloaked ethnic and cultural hatreds and that their destructive social policies achieve their real (as opposed to their stated) aims. Because our federal and most state governments are dominated by liberals, those governments are illegitimate and the people have the right of immediate rebellion.

    White Nationalists, believe that liberal elites will never tolerate the loss of power that comes from stripping down the U.S. Government to its original conception of a loose confederation, and that liberals would resort to any and all means including electoral fraud, suspension of freedom of speech and of the press, warrantless arrests, suspension of habeas corpus, inciting racial violence, and inciting mass migrations into the United States to avoid any such loss of power.

    Most White Nationalists view our liberal elites as extremely dangerous, - as vicious and manipulative in the use of police power as they are cowardly in their personal lives. ​


    A libertarians view of White Nationalism:
    White Supremacy is about control over a racial group which is seen as inferior. The group that is seen as inferior is controlled and ruled over by the supremacists. They are mistreated and discriminated against in violent ways by the supremacist group....

    But what’s the difference between white supremacy and white nationalism? As was explained earlier white supremacy, any racial supremacy, is about control over other races that are deemed to be inferior. White supremacy is violent, whereas white nationalism is peaceful. White Nationalism is about white identity and white homelands. It’s about white ethnonations and preserving the heritage, history, values, culture, and achievements of The European Peoples. It’s not violent, it’s not intolerant. It’s about preserving a racial identity, white identity. It’s about advocating for white interests in a peaceful way. ...

    White supremacy is a fringe movement followed by a few societal outcasts and it should be condemned and kept to the peripheries of society. White nationalism, on the other hand, is righteous and peaceful. The Alt Right and White Nationalists, which are essentially one in the same, are fighting for the survival of the white race which is being dispossessed by non white third world immigrants and by Jewish Hegemons that have made their home and center of operation the entire planet (Yes, the author is going off the rails here I think)....

    The Alt Right supports race realism, nationalism, and white identity, among many other principles and core values, like traditionalism. They are not white supremacists but will be labeled as such since we live in a country and a world that blames whites for everything. But who are the real racists and intolerant ones. It’s the non-whites who blame whites for every single problem they experience in their lives. From Black Lives Matter, to CAIR, to LGBT rights activists, to La Raza, to The Jewish Lobby, to white self loathing SJWs and commie street scum along with many many more. These people detest whites and their achievements and will commit acts of violence against them as a means to achieve egalitarian ends and to make whites pay for invented crimes they never committed.
    The Occidental Observer is a self identifying White Nationalist online publication and here is its take on what it stands for:
    A great many other identifiable groups in the multicultural West have a strong sense of identity and interest, but overt expressions of white identity and white interests (or European-American identity and interests) are rarely found among the peoples who founded these societies and who continue to make up the majority.

    This is a completely unnatural state of affairs—the result of a prolonged assault on the legitimacy of these concepts by cultural elites that have dominated public discourse on issues of race and ethnicity since before World War II. We reject labels such as “white supremacist” or “racist” that are routinely bestowed on assertions of white identity and interests as a means of muzzling their expression. All peoples have ethnic interests and all peoples have a legitimate right to assert their interests, to construct societies that reflect their culture, and to define the borders of their kinship group.

    We are highly cognizant of the fact that many of the most strident critics of the legitimacy of white identity and interests have a strong sense of their own ethnic identity and interests. And they have a deep sense of the importance of preserving their people and culture. Non-Western peoples throughout the world continue to seek political power, and they attempt to control their borders, establish their own cultures, and defend their perceived interests.

    Societies in Europe, North America, Australia, and New Zealand that have been controlled by whites for hundreds of years are the only ones to accept their own demise as a moral imperative. We view this outcome as the result of competition over the construction of culture in which the legitimate interests of whites have been compromised.

    The Occidental Observer will attempt to rectify that. Major themes will be the bankruptcy of the current culture of the West, the powerful forces of political orthodoxy, and the debasement of the political process in the areas of both foreign and domestic policy.​

    So basically they see themselves as fighting a cultural war against elements in Western society that would work against the interests of white European people, but not as a hateful racist group, though of course the leftists and major media consider this to be the equivalent of White Supremacy regardless of the facts.
     
  2. JimBowie1958
    Offline

    JimBowie1958 Old Fogey

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Messages:
    47,526
    Thanks Received:
    7,199
    Trophy Points:
    1,870
    Location:
    Fredericksburg, VA
    Ratings:
    +31,286
    So to summarize, 'White nationalism' is like a broader category of ideologue, while White Supremacists and White Separatists are subcategories.

    Much as not all mammals are horses but all horses are mammals, not all White nationalists are White Supremacists, in fact very few are.

    Most of the people there protesting the removal of the Lee statue are heritage defending conservatives, militia types, Confederate culture advocates, libertarians, etc, not neoNazis and KKK.
     
  3. Xelor
    Offline

    Xelor Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2017
    Messages:
    6,857
    Thanks Received:
    983
    Trophy Points:
    210
    Location:
    D.C.
    Ratings:
    +3,508
    I don't know whether that's true. What I know is that white nationalists, although they may not necessarily consider themselves superior to non-whites merely because they are white, they also don't want to see anyone but white people as the existentially dominant plurality or majority of people that enjoy the bounty of the U.S. I observe too that white nationalists don't make much effort to distance themselves from white supremacists, who most certainly are racists, and denounce white supremacists' racial hatred. On the contrary, where I observe gathered one I see the other there also gathered. I don't see the likes of Spencer telling Duke and his set to stay away from white nationalist assemblages.

    It is worth noting too that, unlike white supremacists and white nationalists, the radical leftists called Antifa, are, for the most part, unknown to many mainstream liberals. Sure, Antifa has its origins in political activism of the early-to-mid 20th century, but as an organization in the U.S., until recently it was a thoroughly underground and unrecognized entity. As Loren Balhorn writes:

    Although Antifas continue to function as important poles of attraction for radicalizing youth and guarantee that the far right rarely goes unopposed in many European countries, its political form is of an exclusive nature, couched in its own aesthetic and rhetorical style and inaccessible to the masses of uninitiated people getting involved in activism for the first time. A left-wing subculture with its own social spaces and cultural life is not the same thing as a mass social movement, and we cannot afford to confuse the two.​

    Compound that with the reality that, typically, Americans can't generally and accurately recount the last decade's political history and philosophies, let alone those of the 1920s, and it's no surprise the average liberal American -- people who just as ignorant as their conservative opponents -- is principally unaware of Antifa. [1] White nationalism and white supremacy -- from White Citizens Councils of the 1940s and '50s to their modern reincarnation, the Council of Conservative Citizens -- has far more widely made its presence and ideology known. There is also that Antifa opposes fascism, which, frankly, isn't exactly something any American, no matter their political party affiliation, should embrace, even as they don't propone violent means of doing so.


    Note:
    1. I have to be honest, the first time I heard the name "Antifa," I thought it was something having to do with Islamics or Jews. Truly, the first thing that came to my mind was "The Intifada," and I asked myself, "WTF are those people doing now?"
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. JimBowie1958
    Offline

    JimBowie1958 Old Fogey

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Messages:
    47,526
    Thanks Received:
    7,199
    Trophy Points:
    1,870
    Location:
    Fredericksburg, VA
    Ratings:
    +31,286
    They want to achieve their goals by different means.
    The White Supremacist would just use the legal system to force migration out, harass people into leaving, etc.
    The White Separatist wants to be able to legally segregate society or allow voluntary segregation at least.

    Most White Nationalists i have talked to like Jared Taylor would say that this is unnecessary and that open competition would work just as well and without overt oppression. They object more to Affirmative Action than to the mere presence of nonwhites, though changing immigration laws to allow in more whites than nonwhites is an important element of their agenda as well.

    When one has few friends one is much less choosey.

    I once asked a White Nationalist why they let these rabid anti-semites into the meetings, and he said that they try but its not a big deal as they are mostly harmless, lol. I noted my disagreement and left.



    That issue is rectifying itself, especially over the last week or so.

    Yeah, I used to be in the CCC until I saw how much they were into slandering blacks and Jews. They didnt know I have some of that blood in my veins as well and I took the warning and left them.

    roflmao, dont feel like the Lone Ranger there, lol, I first thought they were some kind of Muslim group too.
     
  5. Xelor
    Offline

    Xelor Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2017
    Messages:
    6,857
    Thanks Received:
    983
    Trophy Points:
    210
    Location:
    D.C.
    Ratings:
    +3,508
    Well, then they don't need to do a damn thing. That already is allowed. You don't think the KKK, for example, has black members, do you? It doesn't for two reasons:
    • The Klan's members don't want blacks in the organization.
    • Blacks don't want to join the KKK.
    How much more voluntarily segregated can an organization be?

    Perhaps....However, when one has so few organically obtained friends, one should objectively and with rigorous rationality consider why. In the case of white nationalists and white supremacists, it's not because there's a shortage of white people.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  6. JimBowie1958
    Offline

    JimBowie1958 Old Fogey

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Messages:
    47,526
    Thanks Received:
    7,199
    Trophy Points:
    1,870
    Location:
    Fredericksburg, VA
    Ratings:
    +31,286
    Most private organization can discriminate in membership, but who the hell wants to be in the KKK other than FBI informants?

    No, it is mostly a shortage of objective reporting, with reporters conflating White Nationalism and White Supremacy.

    I dont know how many times I have explained White Nationalism and found that many white people agree with it, then I ask them if they really want to live in a society that intentionally makes nonwhites feel unwelcome?

    Then they all say no, so far anyway.

    It has been a few years since I have asked, maybe things are changing.
     
  7. Xelor
    Offline

    Xelor Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2017
    Messages:
    6,857
    Thanks Received:
    983
    Trophy Points:
    210
    Location:
    D.C.
    Ratings:
    +3,508
    White supremacists, I suspect.
     
    • Funny and Agree!! Funny and Agree!! x 1
  8. Xelor
    Offline

    Xelor Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2017
    Messages:
    6,857
    Thanks Received:
    983
    Trophy Points:
    210
    Location:
    D.C.
    Ratings:
    +3,508
    It's easy to blame "the other" for one's observed deficiencies. Looking in the mirror most often, however, is where one finds the best answer. Of course, finding the answer there necessarily forces one to admit to one's demerits and commit to correcting them.
    One achieves one's goals most reliably by "owning" them, taking responsibility for making them come to fruition (lawfully and ethically), not by blaming others for impeding them.


    Individuals are ultimately the authors and arbiters of their actions, for better or worse, and therefore retain ultimate responsibility for what they do.
    -- Kevin Gibson
     
    • Winner Winner x 1

Share This Page