9 ms·
Yes. And it was as much an act of oppression and "supremacy" then as it is now. "White nationalists" are really just "supremacists" attempting (unsuccessfully
by jqpabc123 3y ago
Yes. And it was as much an act of oppression and "supremacy" then as it is now.
"White nationalists" are really just "supremacists" attempting (unsuccessfully) to avoid the negative implications.
Oppression of "non-whites" is implied by their stated objectives since it is the only realistic way to achieve them.
- nyolfen 3y agomy point was highlighting the incoherence of appealing to tradition
- _cenw 3y ago"America is a nation of immigrants" isn't an appeal here, it's a statement of fact. Ethnic homogeneity, by any definition of white, would require removal of very large parts of the population.
- nyolfen 3y ago"america is a nation of immigrants" makes a normative claim ("we should be in favor of immigration") based on historical fact ("people moved here in the past"). using one to justify the other is what is called "an appeal to tradition". why is this historical fact privileged over the historical fact of genocide? this is an appeal to a tradition among many. let me know if you need your hand held further.
- jqpabc123 3y agowhy is this historical fact privileged over the historical fact of genocide? The pertinent fact is that immigrants are here now --- this is not just history or tradition, it is current reality. Genocide would be an amoral effort to alter this existing reality and enforce "white nationalism" --- by those who obviously think skin color makes them "superior" in some way and grants them to right to oppress or even kill "other" immigrants. Attempting to justify this by past genocide is an "appeal to tradition".
- _cenw 3y agoWow, pettiness based on a narrow reading of that phrase.