Current Events > Why do we respect their wishes and call them white nationalists?

(+) Yeah! (+)

They're fucking neo-Nazis. Calling them "white nationalists" obfuscates that and gives them a name that's less inflammatory. They believe that places like America, Britain and Australia have too many other races that aren't white, and they want to see the white population go up while other race's populations go down. They're literally just espousing another branch of neo-Nazi belief.

It's like how racists want to be called "racial realists" so they can talk about affirmative action being bad, or push fake crime statistics about minority-on-minority crime from shitholes like Breitbart to insinuate that those races are more violent than white people. It's a label that's a lot softer than "racist" or "neo-Nazi". You're letting them dress up as someone with credibility, and by using the more preferable term to them, you're validating or legitimising their cause to them. The greater scope of their words and actions is paved over, because they're a "racial realist", not a racist - by virtue of that distinction, the implication is that they're trying to act in good faith. Which, of course, they aren't.

I feel like we should take "white nationalist" out of the popular vernacular, and use it as a distinction within the wider label of "neo-Nazi". Like "this kid who shot up a church was radicalised on The Base by neo-Nazi rhetoric, from the content of their posts they were into the white nationalism side of things". Nest the term "white nationalism" within "neo-Nazi", and refer to them as neo-Nazis first and foremost - just a different offshoot working towards the same goal.

This might seem like an overly nitpicky issue to suggest, but even though we all know who these scumfucks are, the term "white nationalism" is a whole lot less objectionable than "neo-Nazi" to the naked ear. It's conspicuous enough that most people can pick up that it's some racist dogshit, but the sum of both words on their own are a lot less loaded than "neo-Nazi" and it adds an air of legitimacy to their views by virtue of that relative softness. A fascist prick like Richard Spencer can dress up and get an interview on TV because he's talking about this new right-wing ideology called white nationalism - when in reality he's a fucking neo-Nazi. He wouldn't have gotten a platform like he did in the wake of Donald Trump's victory if we called his repugnant, shit-stain ideology what it really was. And even with the label standing for racist ideals, I think more neo-Nazi scum stand to benefit from dressing their beliefs in terms that people consider to be politically legitimate.

Ultimately, referring to them as white nationalists first and foremost only legitimises what they're trying to accomplish. It's like the broader term "alt-right", where believers in the ideology want a non-loaded, trendy moniker to spread their bullshit. White nationalism is, at least compared to a term like "alt-right", useful as a descriptor - it does tell you the school of thought that these people espouse. My argument here is that white nationalism is just another branch of the neo-Nazi ideology, and it should be referred to as a proponent of neo-Nazi ideology instead of being regarded as its own separate thing. Like I said - instead of identifying people as white nationalists, it might be a better call to regard them as "neo-Nazis with white nationalist beliefs".

We're getting too complacent with the term "white nationalist". If you believe in white nationalism, then you believe in core tenets that are shared by neo-Nazis and deserve to be labelled among that group. White nationalists are neo-Nazis, and their shit-stain political label deserves to be thrown out in favor of labelling the bunch of fuckers as wholesale neo-Nazis.

---

I don't know what the intention was in adopting it, but white nationalist has become a dirty word, so I say it worked out well. It's synonymous with neo nazi, but there's no idiot going "but NAZIS WERE SOCIALIST"

---

Because liberals

---

Probably because it leads into a semantics argument of "well we're NOT (neo-)nazis"

If if it's easier to call a spade a spade, that "spade" will argue endlessly that they're actually a shovel

DuranOfForcena posted...

how is "white nationalist" any less inflammatory? no one i know uses white nationalist to sugarcoat anything. white nationalist comes with all of the same relevant denotations and connotations that "neo-nazi" did, without the extraneous and mostly non-applicable suggestion of having to do with the National Socialist German Workers' Party (which most modern white nationalists don't have anything to do with).

All the new terms are attempts to sanitize the nasty connotations of racism without actually being less racist. Thing is, only people foolish enough to be racist in the first place would think they're doing anything but kicking shit around in the same dirt.

This is in supplement to your point, before someone thinks I'm tryna argue.

---

DuranOfForcena posted...

how is "white nationalist" any less inflammatory? no one i know uses white nationalist to sugarcoat anything. white nationalist comes with all of the same relevant denotations and connotations that "neo-nazi" did, without the extraneous and mostly non-applicable suggestion of having to do with the National Socialist German Workers' Party (which most modern white nationalists don't have anything to do with).

I vaguely remember a time when someone was successful in using white nationalist on gamefaqs without being warned.

It's like how conservatives were saying they'd run over protesters before Charlottesville.

---

As far as I'm concerned, there's absolutely no difference between a neo-Nazi, a White supremacist, a White nationalist, and an alt-righter. They're all different labels of the same moron.

---

All synonymous with human garbage.

Plus I feel like most people recognize "Nationalist" as a bad thing. The only people who try to spin that as a positive tend to be the same people who think interracial marriage is an attempt to "replace" them. Pure idiocy that only idiots believe in.


---

DuranOfForcena posted...

how is "white nationalist" any less inflammatory?

i remember in 2016-17 a lot of the internet response to racists being called that was "i dont see whats wrong with being called a white nationalist. it just means (blablabla)." basically it was an avenue for stupid people to defend themselves with softer language at one point

by now though parlance has changed to the degree that that argument isnt going to fool anyone

---

ultimate reaver posted...

"i dont see whats wrong with being called a white nationalist. it just means (blablabla)."

"it just means we believe in a white led nation that subjugates minorities because they're not white"

How did this ever fool anyone besides themselves?

Now they just go "Racist has lost all meaning!"(While still being upset at being called our for what they are)...


---

I think the main difference between the two is Nazis want non whites killed wheres Nationalists just want them deported or something.

---

YourDrunkFather posted...

I think the main difference between the two is Nazis want non whites killed wheres Nationalists just want them deported or something.

something = killed

---

lol why are you bothered by racists being too stupid to realize "white nationalist" is meant to be inflammatory. when i call someone a white nationalist, its quite obvious there's nothing respectful about. and ive got moderations that can attest to that.

YourDrunkFather posted...

I think the main difference between the two is Nazis want non whites killed wheres Nationalists just want them deported or something.

Both of them serve to create a white ethnostate at the expense of non-white races. There is a difference, but it's to achieve the same goal.

---

MachineJaipur posted...

"it just means we believe in a white led nation that subjugates minorities because they're not white"

How did this ever fool anyone besides themselves?

usually they dressed it up as "im proud of my countrys white people" and skirted around everthing else involved in the situation when pressed for connotation

---

No, we call them White Privileged Heroes.

---

HerpToTheDerp posted...

lol why are you bothered by racists being too stupid to realize "white nationalist" is meant to be inflammatory. when i call someone a white nationalist, its quite obvious there's nothing respectful about. and ive got moderations that can attest to that.

I mean fair enough, but why even bother with the term any more? We all regard it as racist garbage, and it's more or less synonymous with racism and neo-Nazi ideology.

But it still acts as a buffer between someone being called a neo-Nazi, and I think to really put this ideology in the ground and make it too toxic to associate with, it would work better to call them neo-Nazis.

Any sane person thinks white nationalism is a bunch of racist dogshit, but even at its worst it's not going to have the same bite as calling someone a skinhead. Throwing out "white nationalism" in favor of calling them "neo-Nazis" is an instant, iconic shutdown of what they represent that everybody understands clearly, and no-one can really come back from that once the connection is made.

---

Because if you call them nazis or neonazis people get too hung up on the but theyre not real nazis!! thing. Its easier to just skip all that and get to the point

---

thronedfire2 posted...

Because if you call them nazis or neonazis people get too hung up on the but theyre not real nazis!! thing. Its easier to just skip all that and get to the point

Nazis, sure - I can see that happening. But neo-Nazis have been a thing for decades, and it's a fight worth fighting to paint white nationalists and any other "soft" ideology as the newest generation of neo-Nazis. Anyone in the way of identifying them as neo-Nazis would probably have a dog in that fight, as there's not such a strong case in regards to historical precedent like there is for people arguing about "Nazi" alone.

Neo-Nazis have no social context outside of being bald, violent goons. Their movement is a lot more modern and flexible than what we know as your run of the mill, WWII Nazi stormtrooper. White nationalism is just the latest resurgence of those bald, violent goons, changing their face to get away with the same shit. No-one in their right mind is going to get their panties in a twist over labelling a far-right extremist group "neo-Nazis" compared to just calling them "Nazis", because neo-Nazis have always been known as violent wannabe fascists from the moment that they were first defined decades ago.

---