3 ms·

The distinction is unclear because "my own people" is such a nebulous concept when you're talking about a nation of millions. For example, for a "white nation",

The distinction is unclear because "my own people" is such a nebulous concept when you're talking about a nation of millions. For example, for a "white nation", does "my own people" include Dutch Quakers? What about Irish Catholics? What about Italians? What about Jews? You will get a different answer depending on which white nationalist you ask. Thus the common element among many white nationalists is not actually wanting to live with one's own people, but exclusions of specific outgroups that are deemed inferior.

TheMode 3y ago
"my own people" in this case means "people that look like me, and have a somewhat similar culture/lifestyle". So obviously it is a bit unclear and you won't be able to get a perfect list of allowed/not allowed group, but it does not imply inferiority at all.
- AlexandrB 3y ago
  The average Christian white nationalist has more in common, culturally, with a Muslim immigrant from the Middle East than with a staunch atheist like myself. But I would probably be welcomed in a "white nation" because of my appearance. If we're being very generous, white nationalism is intellectually lazy since it uses superficial traits like skin color as shorthand for culture/lifestyle when the two are, at best, loosely connected. But I think it's extremely naive to look at the history of white nationalist ideas and assume that superiority/inferiority is not implicit in the ideology.
  - TheMode 3y ago
    It is definitely lazy and superficial, but it does not necessarily make for a terrible indicator. We are much more receptive to color than small shape variation, by removing the former you are preventing (or at the very least mitigating) comparison and the creation of stereotypes. Now I am not from the US so I won't comment about history, and I can fully believe that there is some link between being a white nationalist and believing one "race" to be superior to the others, but I do not believe that this is a reason enough to disqualify the idea.

TheMode 3y ago

"my own people" in this case means "people that look like me, and have a somewhat similar culture/lifestyle". So obviously it is a bit unclear and you won't be able to get a perfect list of allowed/not allowed group, but it does not imply inferiority at all.

AlexandrB 3y ago
The average Christian white nationalist has more in common, culturally, with a Muslim immigrant from the Middle East than with a staunch atheist like myself. But I would probably be welcomed in a "white nation" because of my appearance. If we're being very generous, white nationalism is intellectually lazy since it uses superficial traits like skin color as shorthand for culture/lifestyle when the two are, at best, loosely connected. But I think it's extremely naive to look at the history of white nationalist ideas and assume that superiority/inferiority is not implicit in the ideology.
- TheMode 3y ago
  It is definitely lazy and superficial, but it does not necessarily make for a terrible indicator. We are much more receptive to color than small shape variation, by removing the former you are preventing (or at the very least mitigating) comparison and the creation of stereotypes. Now I am not from the US so I won't comment about history, and I can fully believe that there is some link between being a white nationalist and believing one "race" to be superior to the others, but I do not believe that this is a reason enough to disqualify the idea.