Out of curiosity, what is the nature of the woman's leadership role?
I'm asking because as I understand it, Antifa isn't something that's cohesive enough to have anything more than local or even-specific leaders. Antifa seems to be more a theme, perhaps even a moniker, than a clearly defined organization, a theme around which groups, variously over time, appear, "do their thing" and recede and disband. Accordingly, it doesn't have a leader who speaks for it in the same way that, say, the Roman Catholic church, the Red Cross, or even the KKK does.
She is basically a shit stirrer who shows up at NAZI events and mocks them.
They should be mocked. Nazis are clowns at best.
The people actually leading the Neo Nazi and white supremacist movements aren't clowns. They are several reprehensible things, but being innately boorish isn't among them; their ill manner is cultivated yet not cultured. They are what they are because they want to be. And they're certainly not funny or jesting.
I agree there are some that are working behind the scenes as cops, politicians, loan offices etc but the ones we see the most are the inbred azz clowns. The most dangerous members are hidden in plain sight because whites refuse to believe they exist. This denial is another example of the "white philosophy".
How could you not be aware of a "white philosophy"?
How that comes to be is irrelevant. I've told you I'm not aware of anything that's been recognized as "the white philosophy" and I've asked you to explain to me what it is, how it works, etc. There are a lot of
philosophies of which I am aware (see also
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy), and
not one of them is the "white philosophy." (and, like you, I don't mean "white" as in a crayon color or someone's name)
Either you're going to share with me what it is so that I can fully and clearly understand what that term/philosophy means and doesn't mean, thus what you mean and don't mean, or you're not. It doesn't even have to be your own essay. It just needs to be something comprehensive, credible and soundly presented.
Readers of my posts will readily observe that I routinely provide links to external references that explain in great detail the terms and concepts to which I refer and that I don't necessarily take the time to directly/fully explain in my post. Part of why I do that is so that I can be fully understood by all. Do you want to be fully and clearly understood? Perhaps instead you want to engage only with individuals who either do know what you mean by "white philosophy" or who don't but are willing to presume they do? I fit into neither of those groups, and I've openly told you as much. So either you're going to, kindly as kindly requested, inform me of what it means or you're not.
