Posted on 08/12/2017 9:27:12 PM PDT by TBP
Hatred of those who aren't White, basically. Stridence and division. A belief that they are "superior" for some reason. Preoccupation with racial identity, instead of American identity.
Actually, it's not particularly interesting. Fringe, racially-obsessed extremism isn't interesting to me.
Richard Spencer and his ilk are just as ignorant as the Black Panthers, the BLM and their ilk.
President Trump's supporters have nothing to do with "white nationalism", period. Anyone who tries to claim such an association is a lying sack of sh-t.
What's "interesting" to me is good old fashioned, unifying American nationalism...
It's a fact that Richard Spencer was invited to speak—he was promoted on the poster I saw—and it's also a fact that Spencer is full of white nationalist sh-t...
Well said. It’s amazing how many here on FR are willing, even scrambling, to deny the history of European whites in the U.S.
But there actually is a group known as the alt right and they did apply for permits down there.
I agree that there are those that show up to events to preempt them. That seems to happen every time.
You're also correct not to simply trust the press or someone on TV applying that moniker willy nilly.
For reference, two links below. One the alt right website and the other, the southern poverty law center's take on them.
https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/ideology/alternative-right
Bullsh-t. Who is denying history? Let's see some examples.
White racists have always been Demoncrats...I smell Soros
It seems to me what they hate is reverse discrimination and white guilt.
Your ascribing antifa and BLM motives to them. I.e. they seem to be more "pro white" whereas the KKK is as much anti black as it is pro white. Antifa and BLM are anti white.
https://altright.com/2017/08/11/what-it-means-to-be-alt-right/
I'm still waiting to see where they've actually done something comparable to a KKK action. For now, all I've heard is talk, which is constitutionally protected by the way.
Though I can't say I'm a big fan of this group, the hysterics over them reminds me of the events leading to Ruby Ridge.
They key for the media is to define the group by its worst members. It’s the opposite of what the media does with Islam.
The founding of the country would be one, unless you believe the US constitution was derived specifically from black muslim principles and written by asians.
And if you haven't noticed, at this point in time, the only institutional bigotry remaining in the US is against whites and males.
Here's a wiki link with some examples of that:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States
Thank you for your sentiments, TBP. It's unfortunate that events such as this expose the ugly underbelly of white nationalism—which is every bit as unacceptable as things like the Black Panther movement, "Antifa" fascism, and BLM lies. The fact that they're "different" from one another—or that some might be more extreme than others—doesn't excuse any of it.
And anyone who is trying to conflate opposition to racism with "denying the history of Europeans in America" or tearing down Confederate statues is completely misguided.
They're coming out of the woodwork today, and I expect to see some blowback. FR is a community for all patriotic American conservatives who believe in equality—Black, White, Yerllow, Red, Brown. Anyone who wants to exclude non-Whites from America's history—or claim that Whites are "superior" in any way—can go pound sand. Individual Freedom is superior, and inasmuch as some White people have helped spread that, then great. But Whites certainly enjoy no monopoly—on either the good or the bad.
While supremacist attitudes are legal in America, I reject them categorically, and I hope Jim Robinson does, too. I'm seeing some seriously over the line stuff today, and might have to re-evaluate my participation in this community based on some of the garbage I'm reading.
I'll wait and see what JimRob and his mods do...
So are the communists who were fighting against them. Media is so one sided on this. There were 2 sides fighting and we only hear the one side was bad.
Here are two perspectives, their own as written and that of the SPLC.
https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/ideology/alternative-right
I've been very consistent for the last 18 years on this site. American Liberty is for all Americans, and nobody "deserves" it more than anybody else.
The fact that one person's hate differs from another's is less significant to me that the willingness to adopt hate in the first place—in any way, shape, or form.
White people in America should be eager to repudiate divisive ideologies which embrace any form of racial superiority—express or implied.
Ideologies can be superior, but they have no intrinsic connection with any specific genetic makeup. Freedom and opportunity are for everyone.
I just don't get trying to tie anything to skin color...La Raza and the Panthers are equally as miguided as anyone who is fixated on their White skin color.
America is a melting pot. Always has been, always will be. I support promoting American Liberty—regardless of where it originated, or to whom it selectively applied, originally...
I think that there are those that oppose progressivism who hold beliefs without virtue or outside the American vision. These people will rally to a standard set up by anyone with little investigation or control.
I think we see Soros like forces on both sides of this event. The violence was the goal. It wouldn’t be possible without the media’s cooperation in the fraud.
And what about non-institutional bigotry? Is that supposed to be somehow acceptable or desirable?
How about this: f-ck all bigotry—institutional or otherwise.
And how about this: f-ck all racism—institutional or otherwise.
Can we agree on those as a starting point?
Where do you live?
As many on the left and the press are doing, you are equating “white nationalism” with “white supremacy”.
In a nutshell, the alt right is a protest response to reverse discrimination.
The only examples I’ve seen of their purported white supremacy is from unfounded claims. It looks to me that everyone is jumping on them because they dared to use the word “white” in a positive context, instead of the politically correct white-is-bad meme.
I jump in because I have a pet peeve about bearing false witness. No matter how much you think the ideology is flawed, they have not proven to be what you’re making them out to be.
So I will defend their right to express their ideology, whether I agree with it or not. What I definitely don’t agree with is when the media ascribes bad behavior to those they disagree with, like the TEA Party, Trump supporters, etc..
Same thing going on here.
No, I'm not. I realize there's a difference.
And stop trying to smear me with that "left and the press" garbage. That couldn't be further from the truth, and is just a attempt to obfuscate.
But both “white nationalism” and “white supremacy” are wrong, even if it's just a matter of degree. If such things are wrong when other races do them, they're equally wrong when Whites do. Or are you OK with La Raza and their ilk?
Nationalism is fine. White nationalism isn't. Black and Hispanic nationalism aren't. Any race-based nationalism is misguided.
America is based on ideas surrounding Liberty—not skin color—and the fact that those ideals originally applied only to Whites is irrelevant at this point.
The exclusivity that originally applied is part of the reason why the People have been trying to form a more perfect union ever since the Constitution was adopted.
We're not there yet, and we never will be with any races fixated on race-based notions of nationalism.
Such limited and shortsighted viewpoints are precisely the opposite of the universal principle of Liberty and Justice for all for which America is supposed to exist...
Except, that's not what they're doing.
I agree that if they were, it'd basically be the same Nazi blut und boden.
Unlike everyone else who's simply echoing what others say about the group, you might actually check out what they say. The press takes folks out of context routinely. I figured most freepers wouldn't fall for this but apparently, the politically correct aspect of race is too much to bear.
Below is a link to the "blood and soil" reference (easily found by searching "blood and soil" site:altright.com), preceded by a salient quote that should help you realize it's not what you're thinking. I can read stuff like this without being "contaminated" and I'm sure you can too.
Blood is primary, soil only secondary.
I don't particularly agree w/the article because I'm not into white nationalism. Nevertheless, I don't think these guys have risen to the "vile" level purported in the original post.
The Nazi blut und boden was about a race being tied to territory, therefore having inherent rights to it, and a responsibility to cultivate it.
The alt right article is an attempt to differentiate racism from nationalism.
But because they said the "magic words" blood and soil in the same sentence, everyone cr*ps their pants.
This is getting tedious today. I need to mow the lawn (not because my soul is intrinsically tied to it, but because I'm listed on the deed and it's getting long.)
“Or are you OK with La Raza and their ilk?”
No, but I have made the point that what the “ilk” are seeking are greater than equal rights, actually do hate whites, and hence are supremacists. (You may want to check my other posts on this subject and yesterday.)
However, the alt right seem to be complaining about reverse discrimination. Which takes them out of the supremacist camp.
I’m not into white nationalism, but white nationalism being “wrong” does not necessarily make it extreme or dangerous.
When I see folks confusing the nationalism with the supremacy, just like the press does, my pointing that out is not obfuscation. It is pointing out the echo chamber. From what I’ve read, I’m the only one here who’s actually posted links to their site so folks can see for themselves what they say. I’ve also posted links to the SPLC description of them.
You on the other hand characterize them like this:
“Hatred of those who aren’t White,”
Not true. You are putting them in the supremacist camp even though you claim to know the difference.
Supremacists are not just “for” their “race”, they are “against” the others because they are better-than. Claiming they hate the non-white is putting them in that supremacist camp.
My pet peeve on this subject is that I have not seen any real evidence of that mentality from the alt right, even though you and the press are saying so so fervently.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.