Modern white nationalist’s are falling apart

Is it just the total amount of people on welfare are higher being white, or is ratio wise?

And there are still laws up in some backwards-ass states preventing atheists from holding office.

No he's just being a typical pretzel-brained liberal trying to conflate a subjective view of culture with an objective welfare statistic that isn't in his favor. His arguments are always incredibly petty and are typically continuum fallacies revolving around semantics rather than substance.

Okay, and you're clearly deluded by your ideology. Derp.

Powerful societies DO exist where it is common to have socialist and progressive views. Double derp. And no, I don't credit their success entirely to their political views, I prefer a scientific-minded investigation into the real causes of their previous and ongoing successes. Spoiler alert: it's due to a combination of geographic luck, sound policy, and adept political navigation of changing circumstances. Somehow, astoundingly, melanin levels have very little if nothing to do with it.

This is worth restating.

@Maroxad said: Unless you have compelling evidence that his white nationalist ideas resulted in him doing battery. Then let's keep their political views out of this.

Again, nope. When your political views are the inherent inferiority of other races and your political activities include plotting, at the very least, the forced expulsion of minorities in order to achieve racial segregation, your worldview is inherently violent. I'm willing to have a chicken or the egg argument-are violent types drawn to a violent ideology because they're violent or does a violent ideology make otherwise harmless people violent?-but either outcome should still result in the condemnation of white supremacy as inherently violent and completely deplorable.

again..

people dont consider Led Zepplin to be black culture because their music is inspired by black music and people dont consider Welfare to be a black cluture because they know the details of the numbers. in fact the vast majority of them have zero idea, not even a top level knowedge.

that all said, what is wrong with wanting to preserve racial culture if one wants to? even though its a huge struggle to define

Sorry dude, gibberish again. The point you're trying to make is in left field and not relevant at all.

ok then moving on...

that all said, what is wrong with wanting to preserve racial culture if one wants to? even though its a huge struggle to define

What is wrong with wanting to preserve your racial and cultural identity? Nothing, inherently.

so why are we even having this conversation?

if that is what Black Panther is claiming to do then why do you have a problem with it?

I never said I had a problem with the movie for being black nationalist wish fulfillment. I'm pointing to the fact that one can't be of sound reasoning to hold progressive views and view The Black Panther's wish fulfillment as anything but problematic and maintain that you're opposed to ethno-nationalism.

If it's not a progressive value to oppose ethno-nationalism as a concept then all the the rhetoric and gas lighting when calling someone or their views "white nationalist" might as well go right out the window.

two questions

1. why not? why cant they do that?

2. is the moral agenda of a movie and not allowing black people to sit at the front of the bus really the moral equivalent?

1. Why can't who do what?

2. Irrelevant deflection. Try again.

1. why cant they work on one agenda while being hypocritical about it?

2. no its actually the core. if your plan is to show how white culture is under attack becasue of all the attention paid to black 'rights' one ABSOLUTELY has to ask if forcing blacks to use a separate bathroom is the same moral equivalent as being hypocritical about the moral agenda of a movie. you will never in a million years EVER move the left an inch without address it. so thus this entire conversation is a waste of your time without addressing it

what is paramount what hours, days and years of conversation will always lead to if you ever hope to change anyone's mind on this and not just waste a ton of time is to address the equivalency of black history compared to white history.

you will never move anyone an inch without doing it

1. You can, but not with any credibility to a reasonable individual.

2. This is like if were were discussing the morality of a "social democracy" and I used Joseph Stalin to make a retarded point. The first tell that you're going to start introducing pseudo logic like false equivalencies and continuum fallacies is that you start dividing my position into numbered "points". It's laughably cartoonish.

Edit: So you edited your point to at least try to provide an honest argument. The argument is not in regards to the morality of "ethno-nationalism", it's whether or not white people and black people should be held to the same moral standard in this regard because of historical context.

1. that is of their concern, should not be of yours, unless you are fighting for their cause and are concerned about how good they are. and if that is the case the we will just paint you as a liberal.

2. there isnt any moral equivalency of white suppression of white culture and that of black suprerssion and there is no way in hell you will ever get leftys to forget it. you can convoluted it, distort it, dismiss it all you want..it will never sell. so..what is the point? what is your objective? what is your predicted outcome?

The argument is not in regards to the morality of "ethno-nationalism", it's whether or not white people and black people should be held to the same moral standard in this regard because of historical context.

and they should not be held to the same moral standard because of the historical context in this specific question

AND its impossible to measure moral equivalency in relation to the past without..well...measuring moral equivalency of the history

Then that's where we disagree. Your position is that a white person today can't be held to the moral standard of a black person today because of things that their ancestors did. Your morality is racially biased.

yes I am saying that.

and yes its racially biased and so what.

history matters. now to what measure is action justified and in what matter of degree is up for conversation but in general the history of your ancestors does matter.

I would think one who is supports racial identity would very much feel their ancestors matter. you seem to only want to look at the good and ignore the bad

@Johnny-n-Roger

also...i would suggest thinking thru the long term effect of painting whites a victims of racism. its going to (in the long term) make you look like weak crying 'special snowflakes'. its not the best stradegy in the long run i think it will end up biting you

From my experience, white supremacists are always the least impressive white people on every level. Attractiveness, intelligence, wealth, you name it. Usually they have an axe to grind with the way the world has treated them because of all of their shortcomings, so they pick an easy target to deflect their anger to.

They're always falling apart.

What is a stradegy?