5 ms·

>A white nationalist uprising in Europe would be deadlier (again) than Islamic extremists taking over most middle eastern nations due to the resources that will

>A white nationalist uprising in Europe would be deadlier (again) than Islamic extremists taking over most middle eastern nations due to the resources that will be available to them. Reckless speculation considering the latter did happen. You're fearmongering in order to drive censorship and oppression of viewpoints you disagree with.

vowelless 7y ago
Yes I disagree with white nationalism. And Islamic extremism. I don’t buy your point :). Islamic jihadis do control a few middle eastern nations. But they are quite powerless in front of the west. Even having access to natural resources like oil doesn’t protect the extremists (do I even need to give examples?). The most concerning Islamic state is Pakistan as it has nukes. But if far right folks take over Austria or Germany again, or other European states or Russia or the US, they will control massive economies, WMDs and have the ability for complete domination in a way never seen before. Let’s just say it is better to be in control of any European nation as opposed to Libya, Syria, Iraq or Iran.
- low_roar1 7y ago
  > But they are quite powerless in front of the west. They are powerful enough to kill more than a hundred people in Paris, France the same night or thousands the same day in US. Your double standard is unhealthy, they are as much as a threat that any other extremist movement as the Muslim population increases in the west so does their influence. And just like white supremacists they see themselves as victim, of this or that, and a bunch of western politicians are buying into that victimhood complex. They certainly have more power than you are willing to admit. And they don't care about our petty political fights and partisanship, cause they are religious extremists and don't believe in western petty political games, no matter the political side. You should read "The management of savagery".
gamblor956 7y ago
How is he fearmongering? A white nationalist uprising is quite literally relatively recent European history, and resulted in the torture and slaughter of tens of millions. Before Al Queda, the West's biggest fear was domestic white nationalist terrorists like Timothy McVeigh. EDIT: It's very disturbing that so many people don't understand what the Nazi platform was all about. The supremacy of the "Aryan Race" was literally a platform of the Nazi party from the beginning. The subjugation of Jews was a part of the party platform from the beginning. The use of paramilitary squads to enforce ideological purity was a part of the party from the beginning. And it just got worse from there.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- ng12 7y ago
  The battleground was fascism vs. capitalism vs. communism. Fascism was, at it's core, reactionairy to the rise of communism and it's dishonest to describe it simply as "white nationalism". Furthermore, for a "white nationalist" movement they spent a whole lot of time killing and oppressing other "whites".
  - 0815test 7y ago
    Fascism was not "reactionary". It was, in many ways, a sibling ideology to 'communism', but with glorification of violence, a broadly "irrational" (i.e. explicitly anti-intellectual, and almost relishing in the use of blatant propaganda as a means of influence) attitude to mass politics and either nationalist or (in the more extreme Nazi version) racially-supremacist ideology as major selling points. "White nationalist" is somewhat inaccurate as you point out but "reactionary" is totally wrong, and Soviet propaganda is the only reason why some people today still think of fascism as "conservative" or "reactionary".
    - ng12 7y ago
      > Fascism was not "reactionary" Fascists gained power in Italy, Germany, and Spain as a direct result of anti-communist sentiment (and in the case of Germany, a failed communist revolution). Mussolini's early writings were directly proposing nationalism as the answer to communism's failures. Everywhere fascism had success it was because it was pitted against the threat of communism. I don't know how the rise of Fascism was anything but reactionary.
      - gamblor956 7y ago
        I agree that facism's rise was tied to nationalism's rise. But we're talking about the root causes of WWII. And one of the Nazi party's specific goals when invading Poland was to exterminate the Jews and Roma (Gypsy) populations of Europe.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
boomboomsubban 7y ago
>Reckless speculation considering the latter did happen Are you saying that Islamic extremists took over most of the Middle East?

vowelless 7y ago

Yes I disagree with white nationalism. And Islamic extremism. I don’t buy your point :). Islamic jihadis do control a few middle eastern nations. But they are quite powerless in front of the west. Even having access to natural resources like oil doesn’t protect the extremists (do I even need to give examples?). The most concerning Islamic state is Pakistan as it has nukes. But if far right folks take over Austria or Germany again, or other European states or Russia or the US, they will control massive economies, WMDs and have the ability for complete domination in a way never seen before. Let’s just say it is better to be in control of any European nation as opposed to Libya, Syria, Iraq or Iran.

low_roar1 7y ago
> But they are quite powerless in front of the west. They are powerful enough to kill more than a hundred people in Paris, France the same night or thousands the same day in US. Your double standard is unhealthy, they are as much as a threat that any other extremist movement as the Muslim population increases in the west so does their influence. And just like white supremacists they see themselves as victim, of this or that, and a bunch of western politicians are buying into that victimhood complex. They certainly have more power than you are willing to admit. And they don't care about our petty political fights and partisanship, cause they are religious extremists and don't believe in western petty political games, no matter the political side. You should read "The management of savagery".

gamblor956 7y ago

How is he fearmongering? A white nationalist uprising is quite literally relatively recent European history, and resulted in the torture and slaughter of tens of millions. Before Al Queda, the West's biggest fear was domestic white nationalist terrorists like Timothy McVeigh. EDIT: It's very disturbing that so many people don't understand what the Nazi platform was all about. The supremacy of the "Aryan Race" was literally a platform of the Nazi party from the beginning. The subjugation of Jews was a part of the party platform from the beginning. The use of paramilitary squads to enforce ideological purity was a part of the party from the beginning. And it just got worse from there.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
ng12 7y ago
The battleground was fascism vs. capitalism vs. communism. Fascism was, at it's core, reactionairy to the rise of communism and it's dishonest to describe it simply as "white nationalism". Furthermore, for a "white nationalist" movement they spent a whole lot of time killing and oppressing other "whites".
- 0815test 7y ago
  Fascism was not "reactionary". It was, in many ways, a sibling ideology to 'communism', but with glorification of violence, a broadly "irrational" (i.e. explicitly anti-intellectual, and almost relishing in the use of blatant propaganda as a means of influence) attitude to mass politics and either nationalist or (in the more extreme Nazi version) racially-supremacist ideology as major selling points. "White nationalist" is somewhat inaccurate as you point out but "reactionary" is totally wrong, and Soviet propaganda is the only reason why some people today still think of fascism as "conservative" or "reactionary".
  - ng12 7y ago
    > Fascism was not "reactionary" Fascists gained power in Italy, Germany, and Spain as a direct result of anti-communist sentiment (and in the case of Germany, a failed communist revolution). Mussolini's early writings were directly proposing nationalism as the answer to communism's failures. Everywhere fascism had success it was because it was pitted against the threat of communism. I don't know how the rise of Fascism was anything but reactionary.
    - gamblor956 7y ago
      I agree that facism's rise was tied to nationalism's rise. But we're talking about the root causes of WWII. And one of the Nazi party's specific goals when invading Poland was to exterminate the Jews and Roma (Gypsy) populations of Europe.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

boomboomsubban 7y ago

>Reckless speculation considering the latter did happen Are you saying that Islamic extremists took over most of the Middle East?