4 ms·

How is this "by definition" white nationalism?! They barely mention race, and when they do, it's in a completely neutral context. There are even scientific stud

by tomp 10y ago

How is this "by definition" white nationalism?! They barely mention race, and when they do, it's in a completely neutral context. There are even scientific studies supporting their position, i.e. that more homogenous culture makes for more trustworthy communities [1]. Of course, I'm the first person to doubt sociological research, but even if it's false, I see no reason to force people to live with others they don't like. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_D._Putnam#Diversity_and_trust_within_communities https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_D._Putnam#Diversity_and...

burkaman 10y ago
Well, if a white person cites that research as a reason to halt immigration and preserve their racial and cultural homogeneity, then they are a white nationalist. I did not make a value judgement in my comment, I'm just comparing the text to the definition. As to why this is specifically white nationalism, I'll pull some more quotes for you. > Natural conservatives can broadly be described as the group that the intellectuals above were writing for. They are mostly white, mostly male middle-American radicals, who are unapologetically embracing a new identity politics that prioritises the interests of their own demographic. "Natural conservatives" here are a group that the authors have identified as a key member of the alt-right coalition. > This follows decades in which left-wingers on campus sought to remove the study of “dead white males” from the focus of western history and literature curricula. An establishment conservative might be mildly irked by such behaviour as they switch between the State of the Union and the business channels, but to a natural conservative, such cultural vandalism may just be their highest priority. Here, alt-right members are concerned specifically by the removal or dilution of white culture. They might respect the promotion of other cultures in other countries, but in America they support their own culture only, which as we have seen, is white culture. > Although the alt-right consists mostly of college-educated men, it sympathises with the white working classes and, based on our interviews, feels a sense of noblesse oblige. Notice that white working classes specifically are worthy of sympathy, not all working classes. > In response to concerns from white voters that they’re going to go extinct, the response of the Establishment — the conservative Establishment — has been to openly welcome that extinction. Here, the Establishment is accused of not caring about white extinction. There is no concern about the extinction of other racial cultures, in fact that is the goal. Other races can stick to their own countries. There is a section about neo-Nazis, but the authors dismiss them as generally unwelcome in the alt-right movement. Yes, this article does promote the idea that racial nationalism is a natural impulse for people of any race, but it is written from a white American perspective, and promotes the idea that America should be a culturally white nation with limited immigration. I encourage you to read the whole article. I am not taking things out of context or twisting words, this is a description of the alt-right movement as a bunch of white people who want to preserve their own culture and halt immigration.
- tomp 10y ago
  Ok so for you "nationalism" in a predominantly white country equals "white nationalism". Well, I guess there's not much I can say against that definition, except that the term is usually used in a much more emotionally charged way (and with much more negative connotations)
  - burkaman 10y ago
    Can you tell me your definition? I could be wrong. There's a little more to it than just nationalism in a predominantly white country, though. Nationalism generally means support of national identity above all else. This article promotes white identity above national identity, but the outlet for that feeling is to make the nation into a white nation, so that supporting white culture and supporting the nation are one and the same. Note that the article never talks about American culture. It talks about white culture and white identity politics.
    - tomp 10y ago
      I mean, yeah, I guess I see your point... As long as you're willing to criticise e.g. black nationalist/culture movements just as much.
      - burkaman 10y ago
        I'm trying very hard not to criticize anything in these comments. I'm really just trying to summarize the description that article provides. It's not like I'm uncovering a hidden subtext, I think the authors would generally agree with my summary. I'm not using white nationalist as an insult, I'm calling Breitbart white nationalist because that accurately describes the beliefs that they cater to. Maybe Steve Bannon wouldn't call himself that because it's obviously a politically and emotionally charged term, but if he agrees with the views described in this article, he is a white nationalist.
- masonic 10y ago
  "Well, if a white person cites that research as a reason to halt immigration and preserve their racial and cultural homogeneity." You keep inventing stuff. None of the immigration comments referred to race/ethnicity in any way. You do realize that white people immigrate too, right?

by tomp 10y ago

burkaman 10y ago

Well, if a white person cites that research as a reason to halt immigration and preserve their racial and cultural homogeneity, then they are a white nationalist. I did not make a value judgement in my comment, I'm just comparing the text to the definition. As to why this is specifically white nationalism, I'll pull some more quotes for you. > Natural conservatives can broadly be described as the group that the intellectuals above were writing for. They are mostly white, mostly male middle-American radicals, who are unapologetically embracing a new identity politics that prioritises the interests of their own demographic. "Natural conservatives" here are a group that the authors have identified as a key member of the alt-right coalition. > This follows decades in which left-wingers on campus sought to remove the study of “dead white males” from the focus of western history and literature curricula. An establishment conservative might be mildly irked by such behaviour as they switch between the State of the Union and the business channels, but to a natural conservative, such cultural vandalism may just be their highest priority. Here, alt-right members are concerned specifically by the removal or dilution of white culture. They might respect the promotion of other cultures in other countries, but in America they support their own culture only, which as we have seen, is white culture. > Although the alt-right consists mostly of college-educated men, it sympathises with the white working classes and, based on our interviews, feels a sense of noblesse oblige. Notice that white working classes specifically are worthy of sympathy, not all working classes. > In response to concerns from white voters that they’re going to go extinct, the response of the Establishment — the conservative Establishment — has been to openly welcome that extinction. Here, the Establishment is accused of not caring about white extinction. There is no concern about the extinction of other racial cultures, in fact that is the goal. Other races can stick to their own countries. There is a section about neo-Nazis, but the authors dismiss them as generally unwelcome in the alt-right movement. Yes, this article does promote the idea that racial nationalism is a natural impulse for people of any race, but it is written from a white American perspective, and promotes the idea that America should be a culturally white nation with limited immigration. I encourage you to read the whole article. I am not taking things out of context or twisting words, this is a description of the alt-right movement as a bunch of white people who want to preserve their own culture and halt immigration.

tomp 10y ago
Ok so for you "nationalism" in a predominantly white country equals "white nationalism". Well, I guess there's not much I can say against that definition, except that the term is usually used in a much more emotionally charged way (and with much more negative connotations)
- burkaman 10y ago
  Can you tell me your definition? I could be wrong. There's a little more to it than just nationalism in a predominantly white country, though. Nationalism generally means support of national identity above all else. This article promotes white identity above national identity, but the outlet for that feeling is to make the nation into a white nation, so that supporting white culture and supporting the nation are one and the same. Note that the article never talks about American culture. It talks about white culture and white identity politics.
  - tomp 10y ago
    I mean, yeah, I guess I see your point... As long as you're willing to criticise e.g. black nationalist/culture movements just as much.
    - burkaman 10y ago
      I'm trying very hard not to criticize anything in these comments. I'm really just trying to summarize the description that article provides. It's not like I'm uncovering a hidden subtext, I think the authors would generally agree with my summary. I'm not using white nationalist as an insult, I'm calling Breitbart white nationalist because that accurately describes the beliefs that they cater to. Maybe Steve Bannon wouldn't call himself that because it's obviously a politically and emotionally charged term, but if he agrees with the views described in this article, he is a white nationalist.
masonic 10y ago
"Well, if a white person cites that research as a reason to halt immigration and preserve their racial and cultural homogeneity." You keep inventing stuff. None of the immigration comments referred to race/ethnicity in any way. You do realize that white people immigrate too, right?