Trump Base Is Part of Domestic Terrorism Threat

[DadSmith]

Jamil, you hit on what's probably the central part of all of this -- Racialization was baseline unacceptable in polite society for a couple decades, which drove white nationalism underground almost to the point of extinction.

The new thrust of race is everything is naturally going to make some white people have racial consciousness, and not in the way the wokened hope.

Since I'm a filthy lefty who thinks that all this wokeshit was COINTELPRO to break the back of occupy, I'd argue this is a feature, not a bug, and the oligarchs want us fighting on identity lines while their equities continue to increase in value and the street violence gives them an excuse to disarm us, but that's just me.

When you all say white and black nationalist are you talking about white and black supremacist?

 

[larcat]

When you all say white and black nationalist are you talking about white and black supremacist?

In this context I suppose I actually mean supremacist or separatist, yes.

 

[foszoe]

When you all say white and black nationalist are you talking about white and black supremacist?

If you identify as a nationalist, what meaning does putting white in front of it amplify? What is the purpose of putting white in front of it?

 

[jamil]

Jamil, you hit on what's probably the central part of all of this -- Racialization was baseline unacceptable in polite society for a couple decades, which drove white nationalism underground almost to the point of extinction.

The new thrust of race is everything is naturally going to make some white people have racial consciousness, and not in the way the wokened hope.

Since I'm a filthy lefty who thinks that all this wokeshit was COINTELPRO to break the back of occupy, I'd argue this is a feature, not a bug, and the oligarchs want us fighting on identity lines while their equities continue to increase in value and the street violence gives them an excuse to disarm us, but that's just me.

Jeez. Occupy was ********. There are different factions involved, sure. I think what you call oligarchs is pretty apt. I call them "establishment". It's the Nancy Pelosi Democrats, and Mitch McConnell Republicans who have meaningless squabbles over which factional vision should lead the exploiters of people. The democrat establishment exploits the wokeists and the socialists to further their goals. The chamber-o-commerce Republicans like McConnell ally themselves with establishment democrats when the "establishment" is challenged. It looks to me like their biggest complaint with each other is about who gets to be the leader.

The wokeness wasn't organic, I'll give you that. It was basically communists wanting to change the world. They were baked in the humanity departments of higher education, teaching the teachers for 3 generations. The fruit of that was decades of teachers teaching in K-12 and beyond. The fruit of that is the younger millennials, and zoomers believing all that nonsense. So now they're out in the wild. But I do think that the oligarchs exploit them. And that's a dangerous game because the wokists have the potential to gain way more politcal capital than I think even the powerful establishment can handle.

 

[DadSmith]

If you identify as a nationalist, what meaning does putting white in front of it amplify? What is the purpose of putting white in front of it?

Because I am white and it seems that people think putting your country 1st is evil.

 

[jamil]

When you all say white and black nationalist are you talking about white and black supremacist?

If you're alluding to the idea that nationalists who happen to be "Black" and nationalists who happen to be "White" are not racially inclined but simply want to be nationalists without regard to their own race, that's not the case. There are such nationalists, which I would say are the America first kinds of folks. And though mostly white, there are quite a few "browner" people and they really don't make it an issue of race. But when we say "White Nationalists" or "Black Nationalists", what that means is people who believe that Whites should have their own nation or Blacks should have their own nation. They're not necessarily White or Black Supremacists, though there is a lot of overlap there.

 

[DadSmith]

If you're alluding to the idea that nationalists who happen to be "Black" and nationalists who happen to be "White" are not racially inclined but simply want to be nationalists without regard to their own race, that's not the case. There are such nationalists, which I would say are the America first kinds of folks. And though mostly white, there are quite a few "browner" people and they really don't make it an issue of race. But when we say "White Nationalists" or "Black Nationalists", what that means is people who believe that Whites should have their own nation or Blacks should have their own nation. They're not necessarily White or Black Supremacists, though there is a lot of overlap there.

Sounds like a mess

 

[jamil]

Because I am white and it seems that people think putting your country 1st is evil.

If you are one of those America First proponents, which from the body of your posts on INGO I am safe in assuming such, you are not a White Nationalist. A White Nationalist is distinct from a nationalist who happens to be white or black. So please, don't call yourself a White Nationalist, unless you want to be associated with the group primarily made up of racists who advocate that America needs to be White.

 

[jamil]

Sounds like a mess

Well words that have one meaning in a certain context, can have very different meanings in other contexts.

 

[drillsgt]

If you identify as a nationalist, what meaning does putting white in front of it amplify? What is the purpose of putting white in front of it?

It's just what the left and the media do to twist and change language. By putting white in front of it to the uneducated it sounds like supremacist and if they keep using it when talking about white supremacists it becomes the same. It's not that the left really think that white supremacists are really that much of a danger but they really hate those that identify as 'nationalists'. If you ran around calling yourself a 'white globalist' they probably wouldn't have an issue with it.

 

[jamil]

It's just what the left and the media do to twist and change language. By putting white in front of it to the uneducated it sounds like supremacist and if they keep using it when talking about white supremacists it becomes the same. It's not that the left really think that white supremacists are really that much of a danger but they really hate those that identify as 'nationalists'. If you ran around calling yourself a 'white globalist' they probably wouldn't have an issue with it.

That's not true. There is a distinctive meaning in these groups that have a color in front of "Nationalist". These groups themselves do not disagree with that meaning. They are openly vocal about wanting a nation that is of one race. That doesn't necessarily make them supremacists, but there is considerable overlap.

There is no group that I'm aware of that is "white globalist". There are simply globalists, and they're not particularly grouped racially. So that isn't a point that furthers your idea. Seriously, people should stop this line of thinking that the "White" before "Nationalist" doesn't mean something different from being a Nationalist who happens to be white. It makes it look like you're giving cover to the people who want a pure white nation.

 

[drillsgt]

That's not true. There is a distinctive meaning in these groups that have a color in front of "Nationalist". These groups themselves do not disagree with that meaning. They are openly vocal about wanting a nation that is of one race. That doesn't necessarily make them supremacists, but there is considerable overlap.

There is no group that I'm aware of that is "white globalist". There are simply globalists, and they're not particularly grouped racially. So that isn't a point that furthers your idea. Seriously, people should stop this line of thinking that the "White" before "Nationalist" doesn't mean something different from being a Nationalist who happens to be white. It makes it look like you're giving cover to the people who want a pure white nation.

It is true, my point is about leftist and media manipulation they are using white nationalist as an interchangeable term for those that are nationalists or for US first as opposed to globalists, don't be naive, it's leftist 101. And c'mon man you know my globalist term was a joke.

 

[Magyars]

Sons of Liberty....White Nationalist......in the communist revisionist history!

 

[jamil]

It is true, my point is about leftist and media manipulation they are using white nationalist as an interchangeable term for those that are nationalists or for US first as opposed to globalists, don't be naive, it's leftist 101. And c'mon man you know my globalist term was a joke.

It did not sound like that was all you're saying, because some folks have been trying to downplay white nationalism as if it's just nationalists who happen to be white.

If that's all you're saying then sure. It's the premise of this whole thread, people associating the America first types with terrorism, which is complete ********. There's a huge difference between America first, and White America first. I did not get the globalist joke.

 

[Kutnupe14]

It is true, my point is about leftist and media manipulation they are using white nationalist as an interchangeable term for those that are nationalists or for US first as opposed to globalists, don't be naive, it's leftist 101. And c'mon man you know my globalist term was a joke.

Yeah no. You can be a Nationalist, who happens to be White. The color distinction isn’t necessary. Being a White Nationalist, the race distinction is noteworthy.

 

[larcat]

I would say here though, that any sort of nationalism will be painted as hard right/reactionary even if it's a polyglot nationalism.

Not saying that's right, but that's where the Overton window is at.

 

[DadSmith]

I think the confusion comes from the fact that Nazi Germany were National Socialists and were nationalist. Now anyone nationalist is evil when in fact it isn't. The evil part is socialist. Nationalist are the true patriots of any country.

 

[jamil]

Yeah no. You can be a Nationalist, who happens to be White. The color distinction isn’t necessary. Being a White Nationalist, the race distinction is noteworthy.

No, he's agreeing with that. His correction was that the press is SAYING that the nationalists who happen to be white, who aren't saying that it should be a White Nation, are white nationalists. They're conflating nationalists with white nationalists. And he's right about that.

 

[BugI02]

Most Black Americans are killed by other Black Americans. That is indeed a fact. Of those people, the majority are people involved in criminality. I am not involved in criminal enterprise, so the odds of me being killed by another Black American are slim to none. Conversely, simply the color of my skin could make me a target of a WN. Whereas I can realistically avoid the former, it would be difficult to avoid the later, without a good bleach cleaning, and a bowl of boxed Mac and Cheese.

This is loose and shoddy thinking. The odds of you being killed by another black American are directly proportional to your odds of meeting one who would assault or rob you, which statistically is far more likely than you let on

Converesely, your odds of being killed by a white supremacist are directly proportional to your odds of meeting one. The fact that black criminals are so common and white supremacists are so rare means that one situation is far more likely than the other

 

[BugI02]

What’s the bigger threat to society? A very large, organized, well funded group of brainwashed ideologues rioting in many major cities every night, creating “autonomous zones”, terrorizing people just for driving through the streets, burning buildings, looting businesses, killing people, with the cover of the media and the Democrats, using the power of the state to protect these idiots, including the guy you voted for? Or, a small, less organized, poorly funded, ideologically deranged group of racist thugs occasionally pulling off something horrible?

The more dangerous one is easily the one running with autonomy and the power if the press and the state giving it cover. One of the most dangerous things about that is the deeds of the Left wing radicals are radicalizing more and more people on the right.

It's almost as if hyping the danger of the white supremacists was intended to take the spotlight away from the real danger