14 ms·

Why I Left White Nationalism

89 points by diogofranco 10y ago

golergka 10y ago
So, the author was in one group and subscribed to the majority opinion there, and then adopted another majority opinion of a new social circle?
- MereInterest 10y ago
  Every opinion is the majority opinion of some social circle. That is not the point of the article. The point is that the author has been exposed to both white supremacy and tolerance, is in a position where he can evaluate both of them from an insider's view, and clearly chose tolerance as the morally superior option.
  - golergka 10y ago
    > Every opinion is the majority opinion of some social circle. But not every opinion is the majority opinion of the social circle that the person is immersed in right now. > clearly chose tolerance as the morally superior option Possibly. But also it's possible that the fact that this was a much more socially acceptable opinion played a significant role.
    - apozem 10y ago
      I constantly see this assumption from people who attack left-wing culture. It is a mistake to assume someone supports PC politics out of "virtue signaling" or a desire to be socially accepted. Maybe some people do that, but many don't. Most of the time you won't have proof either way. Don't assume. It is intellectually lazy to discount the possibility that someone could assess pro-diversity ideas with an open mind and simply find them superior. Regardless of your politics, that's just giving an opposing ideology the respect it deserves. You don't know if this guy drifted left because of social pressure, and frankly that's a silly and disrespectful thing to assume.
      - golergka 10y ago
        I would make the same point if he migrated from left to right in the similar circumstances. My logic is not based on the nature of the beliefs he expressed; only on a correlation between peer pressure and what he believes in.
        eli_gottlieb 10y ago
        Do you believe anyone ever actually takes any position out of genuine conscience?
        golergka 10y ago
        Absolutes don't exist, and the world isn't black and white - which doesn't mean that everything is the same shade of 50% gray.
- dominotw 10y ago
  he seems to be overly prone to ideology.
cabalamat 10y ago
What a horrible website. It tells you you have to pay to see the article, and then disables the back button.
- Alex_Butters 10y ago
  just open in incognito mode
- Broken_Hippo 10y ago
  This gives a paywall if I go direct from HN, but if I hit the 'web' button on the top of the comment page (this one!), I can click on the google link to read it.
matthewmacleod 10y ago
Through many talks with devoted and diverse people there — people who chose to invite me into their dorms and conversations rather than ostracize me — I began to realize the damage I had done. I suppose this is the key. No group will be convinced by being publicly ostracised or relentlessly attacked; that's going to do nothing but further entrench division. But it's difficult to figure out steps that one can take as an individual to help.
- katzgrau 10y ago
  It's true, but it really has to start with an open mind on their end. In my experience, I find that people who have racist beliefs often see differing viewpoints as the enemy - the first breach being simple consideration of a new perspective. That's not a good place to be in terms of personal growth. Unfortunately, any sort of hate group's views are damaging to society as a whole, and the larger community has to balance understanding and tolerance (with the aim of eventual conversion) with the need to immediately condemn it. I view it as a societal disease that must be curbed. Sometimes I worry that too much understanding is as bad as none at all. Supremacy of one group of living things over another (including animals vs humans) simply cannot be legitimized to any extent.
  - davidp 10y ago
    I find that people who have racist beliefs often see differing viewpoints as the enemy - the first breach being simple consideration of a new perspective. True, but the problem is not limited to racists. I'm in the "moderate" part of the political spectrum, and I find that far too many people on both the left and right have the same behaviors. I suggest to my left-leaning friends that government should be a "last resort" solution at best, and is frequently actually the problem; to my right-leaning friends I explain the crucial importance of privacy, civil liberties, and equal justice; and in either case the response is frequently incredulous disbelief and contempt for my naivete and/or obvious privilege yada yada yada. The echo chambers are real, and they are a threat to our civil society.
- luso_brazilian 10y ago
  This cannot be stressed enough. There are plenty of behaviors that people, specially young people going through the "rebellious" phase of their lives, engage for the shock value, for the "I'm the only sane man among sheeps" feeling and that can usually be explained by the lack of maturity and contact with the real world. The only result that comes with ostracizing these people is to throw them at the arms of the only groups that will accept them with open arms: people seriously sharing the same ideology and that will welcome this person with open arms. The real solution to ignorance is not to cut the ignorant from the flock but to show them the errors on their ways. People tend to grow out of these phases and helping them out in that path instead of cutting them and punishing them is a much better way to deal with this problem.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
blahi 10y ago
I am very surprised that someone who claims to have been on mr. Trump's side would fall a victim to the propaganda against him. Safe spaces in college are indeed brainwashing facilities, it seems. I went through exactly the opposite transformation. Education and the media have been tools in the hands of "liberals" who push an agenda. They don't teach reason. They teach one interpretation of the facts and deny the possibility of any other interpretations. They are teaching dogma. And masses of people are raised not to listen when they converse, but to wait for their turn to speak. They think they know everything because they stuffed a bunch of facts in their heads. They drawn every other interpretation, downvoting it into oblivion, without finishing even the first sentence. This is not egalitarianism. This is preaching. It is the new Catholic Church, taking on only the worst of the qualities of its predecessor. No, Trump did no call for ban on all muslims. No, he did not call all Mexicans rapists. His words were taken out of context, twisted and broadcasted a million times in order to put an obviously corrupt politician in office instead. I am no fan of mr. Trump but this "liberal" dogma has to be stopped.
- maxerickson 10y ago
  Initial statements of the Muslim ban were not particularly nuanced. https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-statement-on-preventing-muslim-immigration https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-... Good luck explaining how the media twisted the words on the campaign website.
- brohoolio 10y ago
  I cant tell if this comment is trolling or serious. My gut says its trolling but the comment history of the poster has me confused.
- MereInterest 10y ago
  It isn't brainwashing, it is just exposure. The author does not state that it was anything being taught, anything being forced on him. Rather, it was the exposure to individuals who were being hurt by the politics he favored. Previously, he had been in exactly the sort of echo chamber that you are describing, and afterward, he had conversations with people outside of that bubble. It is the same way that many people will be strongly against gay rights, until one of their relatives comes out. Knowing somebody who is personally hurt by an ideology gives somebody the kick that they need to reconsider the ideology as a whole.
daxorid 10y ago
Data point of one incoming. My "racist" beliefs originate from the inevitable conclusions reached by the voluminous research done on racial g-factor correlates, behavioral genetics, and SES-controlled twin adoption studies in the last half century. Specifically those studies which are both controlled for, and devoid of, those biases which Gould often lamented about physiognomy papers of old. From my perspective, it is not the nationalists who have closed their minds off. The left has their own special brand of science denialism right here on this topic.
- ebbv 10y ago
  Yes my flat earth beliefs are well researched and based on numerous facts as well. Turtles exist therefore it's turtles all the way down. It is the sphere-ists whose minds are closed to me.
  - saltvedt 10y ago
    No, it's a real problem, examples of the lefts "special brand of science denialism": http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/687863?journalCode=phos http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/687863?jour... https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/should-research-on-race-and-iq-be-banned/ https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/should-rese...
    - hga 10y ago
      And using "flat earth beliefs" as a comparison is telling, seeing as how that conceit is a 19th Century propaganda campaign (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth#Myth_of_the_flat_Earth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth#Myth_of_the_flat_Ea... and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_flat_Earth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_flat_Earth), conjuring up a belief that hadn't been widely held since the High and Late Middle Ages (see the first link).
- aristus 10y ago
  What is it specifically that you believe, and why do you believe it?
mikebay 10y ago
NYTimes talk about White nationalism and Trump mixed nicely in same article. Dear NYTimes why don't you cover real news subjects like Pizzagate example ? Are we denial about that subject and it's long spaghetti where it could lead ? Lol. - Fakenews NYTimes, No thanks
aftalavera 10y ago
To you PEOPLE how constantly claim to be so "diverse",why are you so intolerant with divergent opinions? We do respect your right to be stupid! When are you'll leaving?
- norea-armozel 10y ago
  When those opinions support denying civil rights from minorities like LGBT people then those opinions are inherently wrong. Whether it's civil marriage or respecting trans people when it comes to non-discrimination in the various spheres of public life (employment & public accommodations), these rights shouldn't be a matter of debate but rather the baseline for any discussion. It's not like these rights impede free association in the private sphere.
aftalavera 10y ago
To you PEOPLE how constantly claim to be so "diverse",why are you so intolerant with divergent opinions? We do respect your right to be stupid!
ambulancechaser 10y ago
> Through many talks with devoted and diverse people there — people who chose to invite me into their dorms and conversations rather than ostracize me — I began to realize the damage I had done. > That kind of persuasion happens in person-to-person interactions and it requires a lot of honest listening on both sides. For me, the conversations that led me to change my views started because I couldn’t understand why anyone would fear me. I thought I was only doing what was right and defending those I loved. These two quotes kinda resonate with me. I'm no longer on a college campus and can only take an impression from afar. But it seems like these two scenarios are more and more infrequent. It seems like now you must show that you have not been "tainted" by listening to someone with "reprehensible" opinions. This article states that people who didn't convulse at the mere thought of him, but sat down and talked to him are the reason why he drifted from his ideology. Now, it seems like you could be ostracized yourself for even visiting this person in their dorm room.
- norea-armozel 10y ago
  I think you're drawing too much from the author's experiences when it comes to changing people's minds. Engagement rarely, if ever, changes the opinions of people because people debate to hear how they're right and not how they're wrong. For years I've engaged my parents on the issue of my desire to transition (being that I'm transgender). And every time they respond with a cold shoulder or some mild rebuke. This has been the norm for sixteen years and they're not changing. So why should I engage them or anyone else like them?
  - hga 10y ago
    Forgive me if I'm getting too personal, but are you looking for tolerance or acceptance? Because "live and let live" is an old and honored American tradition, and taking this out of the domain of the family, not being able to refuse to bake a gay wedding cake is the antithesis of that tradition. They're not directly comparable, because it's your parents, then again, you hardly have to go so far as to desire to transition to be given the cold shoulder or anything but a mild rebuke over something else that differs that's fundamental in your nature and that's different between you and your parents (in my case it pertained to simply going to college).
Kenji 10y ago
The reality is that half of the voters chose white supremacy, though saying that makes me a hypocrite. Wut? People who voted for Obama voted for Trump! Seems like when people, like this guy, get emotional over election results, they throw all logic out of the window.
k__ 10y ago
"For every woke dude, there are 10 burned out feminists." I don't know who said this, but it's true for many things. Ten or hundred people telling someone they're wrong, isn't enough to change what year long indoctrination has done. Even if you think "I talked to thousands of racists in my life and I just don't want to waste my time to change their minds" you should still do it, because it has an effect, just not for all of the thousand people you talked to.
rvdavis 10y ago
When the most powerful demographic in the United States came together to assert that making America great again meant asserting their supremacy, they were asserting my supremacy. I find this rhetoric troubling; I know many Trump supporters and none would explain their vote in terms of asserting "supremacy" for their demographic. Given the author's background, I see how he could reach that conclusion, but his assertion stands in opposition to other parts of his article in which he states that engagement is the key to changing minds. I'm not too sure why he thinks that smearing the millions of voters who supported Trump as white supremacists is a positive step toward engaging them in civil discussion.
- MyNameIsFred 10y ago
  Following that statement, the author spends the rest of the article explaining how the people asserting supremacy often do not see it as such. It is an implicit and unwitting reality of the position they are taking. I used to be one of these folks; I couldn't see the harm and hate of my own positions, thanks to the fog of ethnocentrism.

89 points by diogofranco 10y ago

So, the author was in one group and subscribed to the majority opinion there, and then adopted another majority opinion of a new social circle?

MereInterest 10y ago
Every opinion is the majority opinion of some social circle. That is not the point of the article. The point is that the author has been exposed to both white supremacy and tolerance, is in a position where he can evaluate both of them from an insider's view, and clearly chose tolerance as the morally superior option.
- golergka 10y ago
  > Every opinion is the majority opinion of some social circle. But not every opinion is the majority opinion of the social circle that the person is immersed in right now. > clearly chose tolerance as the morally superior option Possibly. But also it's possible that the fact that this was a much more socially acceptable opinion played a significant role.
  - apozem 10y ago
    I constantly see this assumption from people who attack left-wing culture. It is a mistake to assume someone supports PC politics out of "virtue signaling" or a desire to be socially accepted. Maybe some people do that, but many don't. Most of the time you won't have proof either way. Don't assume. It is intellectually lazy to discount the possibility that someone could assess pro-diversity ideas with an open mind and simply find them superior. Regardless of your politics, that's just giving an opposing ideology the respect it deserves. You don't know if this guy drifted left because of social pressure, and frankly that's a silly and disrespectful thing to assume.
    - golergka 10y ago
      I would make the same point if he migrated from left to right in the similar circumstances. My logic is not based on the nature of the beliefs he expressed; only on a correlation between peer pressure and what he believes in.
      - eli_gottlieb 10y ago
        Do you believe anyone ever actually takes any position out of genuine conscience?
        golergka 10y ago
        Absolutes don't exist, and the world isn't black and white - which doesn't mean that everything is the same shade of 50% gray.
dominotw 10y ago
he seems to be overly prone to ideology.

cabalamat 10y ago

What a horrible website. It tells you you have to pay to see the article, and then disables the back button.

Alex_Butters 10y ago
just open in incognito mode
Broken_Hippo 10y ago
This gives a paywall if I go direct from HN, but if I hit the 'web' button on the top of the comment page (this one!), I can click on the google link to read it.

matthewmacleod 10y ago

Through many talks with devoted and diverse people there — people who chose to invite me into their dorms and conversations rather than ostracize me — I began to realize the damage I had done. I suppose this is the key. No group will be convinced by being publicly ostracised or relentlessly attacked; that's going to do nothing but further entrench division. But it's difficult to figure out steps that one can take as an individual to help.

katzgrau 10y ago
It's true, but it really has to start with an open mind on their end. In my experience, I find that people who have racist beliefs often see differing viewpoints as the enemy - the first breach being simple consideration of a new perspective. That's not a good place to be in terms of personal growth. Unfortunately, any sort of hate group's views are damaging to society as a whole, and the larger community has to balance understanding and tolerance (with the aim of eventual conversion) with the need to immediately condemn it. I view it as a societal disease that must be curbed. Sometimes I worry that too much understanding is as bad as none at all. Supremacy of one group of living things over another (including animals vs humans) simply cannot be legitimized to any extent.
- davidp 10y ago
  I find that people who have racist beliefs often see differing viewpoints as the enemy - the first breach being simple consideration of a new perspective. True, but the problem is not limited to racists. I'm in the "moderate" part of the political spectrum, and I find that far too many people on both the left and right have the same behaviors. I suggest to my left-leaning friends that government should be a "last resort" solution at best, and is frequently actually the problem; to my right-leaning friends I explain the crucial importance of privacy, civil liberties, and equal justice; and in either case the response is frequently incredulous disbelief and contempt for my naivete and/or obvious privilege yada yada yada. The echo chambers are real, and they are a threat to our civil society.
luso_brazilian 10y ago
This cannot be stressed enough. There are plenty of behaviors that people, specially young people going through the "rebellious" phase of their lives, engage for the shock value, for the "I'm the only sane man among sheeps" feeling and that can usually be explained by the lack of maturity and contact with the real world. The only result that comes with ostracizing these people is to throw them at the arms of the only groups that will accept them with open arms: people seriously sharing the same ideology and that will welcome this person with open arms. The real solution to ignorance is not to cut the ignorant from the flock but to show them the errors on their ways. People tend to grow out of these phases and helping them out in that path instead of cutting them and punishing them is a much better way to deal with this problem.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

blahi 10y ago

I am very surprised that someone who claims to have been on mr. Trump's side would fall a victim to the propaganda against him. Safe spaces in college are indeed brainwashing facilities, it seems. I went through exactly the opposite transformation. Education and the media have been tools in the hands of "liberals" who push an agenda. They don't teach reason. They teach one interpretation of the facts and deny the possibility of any other interpretations. They are teaching dogma. And masses of people are raised not to listen when they converse, but to wait for their turn to speak. They think they know everything because they stuffed a bunch of facts in their heads. They drawn every other interpretation, downvoting it into oblivion, without finishing even the first sentence. This is not egalitarianism. This is preaching. It is the new Catholic Church, taking on only the worst of the qualities of its predecessor. No, Trump did no call for ban on all muslims. No, he did not call all Mexicans rapists. His words were taken out of context, twisted and broadcasted a million times in order to put an obviously corrupt politician in office instead. I am no fan of mr. Trump but this "liberal" dogma has to be stopped.

maxerickson 10y ago
Initial statements of the Muslim ban were not particularly nuanced. https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-statement-on-preventing-muslim-immigration https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-... Good luck explaining how the media twisted the words on the campaign website.
brohoolio 10y ago
I cant tell if this comment is trolling or serious. My gut says its trolling but the comment history of the poster has me confused.
MereInterest 10y ago
It isn't brainwashing, it is just exposure. The author does not state that it was anything being taught, anything being forced on him. Rather, it was the exposure to individuals who were being hurt by the politics he favored. Previously, he had been in exactly the sort of echo chamber that you are describing, and afterward, he had conversations with people outside of that bubble. It is the same way that many people will be strongly against gay rights, until one of their relatives comes out. Knowing somebody who is personally hurt by an ideology gives somebody the kick that they need to reconsider the ideology as a whole.

daxorid 10y ago

Data point of one incoming. My "racist" beliefs originate from the inevitable conclusions reached by the voluminous research done on racial g-factor correlates, behavioral genetics, and SES-controlled twin adoption studies in the last half century. Specifically those studies which are both controlled for, and devoid of, those biases which Gould often lamented about physiognomy papers of old. From my perspective, it is not the nationalists who have closed their minds off. The left has their own special brand of science denialism right here on this topic.

ebbv 10y ago
Yes my flat earth beliefs are well researched and based on numerous facts as well. Turtles exist therefore it's turtles all the way down. It is the sphere-ists whose minds are closed to me.
- saltvedt 10y ago
  No, it's a real problem, examples of the lefts "special brand of science denialism": http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/687863?journalCode=phos http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/687863?jour... https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/should-research-on-race-and-iq-be-banned/ https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/should-rese...
  - hga 10y ago
    And using "flat earth beliefs" as a comparison is telling, seeing as how that conceit is a 19th Century propaganda campaign (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth#Myth_of_the_flat_Earth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth#Myth_of_the_flat_Ea... and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_flat_Earth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_flat_Earth), conjuring up a belief that hadn't been widely held since the High and Late Middle Ages (see the first link).
aristus 10y ago
What is it specifically that you believe, and why do you believe it?

mikebay 10y ago

NYTimes talk about White nationalism and Trump mixed nicely in same article. Dear NYTimes why don't you cover real news subjects like Pizzagate example ? Are we denial about that subject and it's long spaghetti where it could lead ? Lol. - Fakenews NYTimes, No thanks

aftalavera 10y ago

To you PEOPLE how constantly claim to be so "diverse",why are you so intolerant with divergent opinions? We do respect your right to be stupid! When are you'll leaving?

norea-armozel 10y ago
When those opinions support denying civil rights from minorities like LGBT people then those opinions are inherently wrong. Whether it's civil marriage or respecting trans people when it comes to non-discrimination in the various spheres of public life (employment & public accommodations), these rights shouldn't be a matter of debate but rather the baseline for any discussion. It's not like these rights impede free association in the private sphere.

aftalavera 10y ago

To you PEOPLE how constantly claim to be so "diverse",why are you so intolerant with divergent opinions? We do respect your right to be stupid!

ambulancechaser 10y ago

> Through many talks with devoted and diverse people there — people who chose to invite me into their dorms and conversations rather than ostracize me — I began to realize the damage I had done. > That kind of persuasion happens in person-to-person interactions and it requires a lot of honest listening on both sides. For me, the conversations that led me to change my views started because I couldn’t understand why anyone would fear me. I thought I was only doing what was right and defending those I loved. These two quotes kinda resonate with me. I'm no longer on a college campus and can only take an impression from afar. But it seems like these two scenarios are more and more infrequent. It seems like now you must show that you have not been "tainted" by listening to someone with "reprehensible" opinions. This article states that people who didn't convulse at the mere thought of him, but sat down and talked to him are the reason why he drifted from his ideology. Now, it seems like you could be ostracized yourself for even visiting this person in their dorm room.

norea-armozel 10y ago
I think you're drawing too much from the author's experiences when it comes to changing people's minds. Engagement rarely, if ever, changes the opinions of people because people debate to hear how they're right and not how they're wrong. For years I've engaged my parents on the issue of my desire to transition (being that I'm transgender). And every time they respond with a cold shoulder or some mild rebuke. This has been the norm for sixteen years and they're not changing. So why should I engage them or anyone else like them?
- hga 10y ago
  Forgive me if I'm getting too personal, but are you looking for tolerance or acceptance? Because "live and let live" is an old and honored American tradition, and taking this out of the domain of the family, not being able to refuse to bake a gay wedding cake is the antithesis of that tradition. They're not directly comparable, because it's your parents, then again, you hardly have to go so far as to desire to transition to be given the cold shoulder or anything but a mild rebuke over something else that differs that's fundamental in your nature and that's different between you and your parents (in my case it pertained to simply going to college).

Kenji 10y ago

The reality is that half of the voters chose white supremacy, though saying that makes me a hypocrite. Wut? People who voted for Obama voted for Trump! Seems like when people, like this guy, get emotional over election results, they throw all logic out of the window.

k__ 10y ago

"For every woke dude, there are 10 burned out feminists." I don't know who said this, but it's true for many things. Ten or hundred people telling someone they're wrong, isn't enough to change what year long indoctrination has done. Even if you think "I talked to thousands of racists in my life and I just don't want to waste my time to change their minds" you should still do it, because it has an effect, just not for all of the thousand people you talked to.

rvdavis 10y ago

When the most powerful demographic in the United States came together to assert that making America great again meant asserting their supremacy, they were asserting my supremacy. I find this rhetoric troubling; I know many Trump supporters and none would explain their vote in terms of asserting "supremacy" for their demographic. Given the author's background, I see how he could reach that conclusion, but his assertion stands in opposition to other parts of his article in which he states that engagement is the key to changing minds. I'm not too sure why he thinks that smearing the millions of voters who supported Trump as white supremacists is a positive step toward engaging them in civil discussion.

MyNameIsFred 10y ago
Following that statement, the author spends the rest of the article explaining how the people asserting supremacy often do not see it as such. It is an implicit and unwitting reality of the position they are taking. I used to be one of these folks; I couldn't see the harm and hate of my own positions, thanks to the fog of ethnocentrism.