Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Exactly, except the left twists it to mean that anyone of the white race that is a nationalist is also supposedly a "white" nationalist meaning they want an all white country which is false in most cases.
We all know what "white nationalist" means - please stop pretending that they really just people who "happen to be white but who love America." We know what they are and what they want - MAWA. And if they don't like that, then let them prove otherwise.
Otherwise, you expect us to believe that white's join "white nationalist" groups and end up "surprised" by the racism. What's next? Somebody joining the Klan because they like pointed hoods and cool titles like "grand dragon" and being "surprised" there's more to it than that?
When righties are down to debating the semantics of what "white nationalist really means" you know they've lost because they cannot defend their position. Pathetic.
No he didn't. "Good people on both sides" meant good people for and against tearing down the confederate statues. Not everyone protesting the removal of the statues was a white nationalist just like not everyone demonstrating in support of tearing them down were members of antifa.
And yet when "liberals" mention that not all Muslims or immigrants are bad people, right-wingers mouth off in anger at that statement, which happens to be a fact. And, rest assured, if some black racist group had been involved in those summer riots, we'd still be hearing about it today on right-wing, fact-free forums like this one.
We know what Trump meant when he came to defense of the right-wing bigots. People with honor and who aren't themselves bigots don't immediately start looking for excuses as he did. Unlike those who voted for Trump, the rest of us aren't easily played by him or his idiocy.
When righties are down to debating the semantics of what "white nationalist really means" you know they've lost because they cannot defend their position. Pathetic.
Please. By your definition, the we also "know" what Jewish, Black, and Latino nationalism means and every person who can be associated with those things should then be treated accordingly.
Or is there nuance available for preferred groups?
And yet when "liberals" mention that not all Muslims or immigrants are bad people, right-wingers mouth off in anger at that statement, which happens to be a fact.
Islam is an ideology, not a race. You aren't comparing the same things and so the analogy is invalid.
No one says that all immigrants are bad. Hyperbole is not an argument.
Quote:
We know what Trump meant when he came to defense of the right-wing bigots. People with honor and who aren't themselves bigots don't immediately start looking for excuses as he did. Unlike those who voted for Trump, the rest of us aren't easily played by him or his idiocy.
So, you think the Republicans are running white supremacists because they want to lose the election? Because that is what you are proposing - that they are intentionally choosing candidates to lose. The only other choice is, of course, the correct one - the GOP knows full well that right-wing racism appeals to certain strong parts of their base. This was proven with Trump; he only gained support from the far-right when he mouthed off bigotry.
Clearly, you are unable to defend the GOP or the worst of their supporters with any facts. Your proposal that they are running candidates intentionally to lose is laughable, you have yet to find any defense of Trump's actions, and the rest of your argument is just petty partisan absurdities.
If you are unable, or unwilling, to see the obvious connection between right-wing politics and white supremacists, that is your problem not mine.
Are you so defensive about the racists on the Left? I predict not. Your argument is thus morally invalid.
Didn't you get the memo? America is post Leftist hypocritical shame-tactics. Thus, the Left has moved onto Russian conspiracy theories. You'll have to get with the new strategy.
Yes Trump did he was endorsed by David Duke and the KKK and other white supremacist groups. Donald Trump also said that some of the people in the white supremacist groups were good people and , that sounds like a relationship to me.
And Jeremiah Wright was Obama's pastor. Your argument is morally invalidated by the associations of your best.
A nationalist wants to put their country and their country's citizens at the top of their priority list. A white nationalist wants to put their country and only the white citizens within that country's interests at the top of their priority list. In America that means a nationalist wants what's best for all American citizens without prioritizing one race or ethnicity over another, while typically the interests of citizens of other countries would be a secondary concern.
Great. That's wonderful. Now answer the second part of my question which is how they differ in what they want vis-Ã -vis Black people. Do they want the same thing? If so, what is that? If white nationalists want something different from other nationalists, then what is their desire?
And George Soros funds white hate groups and pays them to protest. He also funds black hate groups so maybe he's just a fan of violence and hate, period. Samantha Bee's husband doesn't want black students in their kids school. So if everyone is a racist, and that's the status quo our conservative and liberals leaders want, who are we to oppose them?
Please explain the differences between a nationalist who happens to be white as opposed to a white nationalist who espouses white supremacy vis-Ã -vis non-white people. How is the first different from the latter in what they want for Black people?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle Bully
A nationalist wants to put their country and their country's citizens at the top of their priority list. A white nationalist wants to put their country and only the white citizens within that country's interests at the top of their priority list. In America that means a nationalist wants what's best for all American citizens without prioritizing one race or ethnicity over another, while typically the interests of citizens of other countries would be a secondary concern.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lhpartridge
Great. That's wonderful. Now answer the second part of my question which is how they differ in what they want vis-Ã -vis Black people. Do they want the same thing? If so, what is that? If white nationalists want something different from other nationalists, then what is their desire?
Nationalists(of any race including whites) give a priority to America and her citizens as a whole. White nationalists focus their priority on white Americans over both non white citizens and non citizens.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
