Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Another White Nationalist

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • TactiKill J.
    replied
    Nationalism involves racial tribalism, because again preservation of culture (race in their eyes) is at the heart of nationalism. They do not want non-whites integrating, this and everything else I've said is based on the comments from self-proclaimed nationalists.

    I'm simply repeating what nationalists have said.

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post
    Nationalism, to the right today involves the preservation of their desired culture and society. Which for them means a culture free of influence from (probably most specifically) Muslims and diversity in general. For instance, one quote you'll hear often from American nationalists is, "diversity makes us weak". Who is "us" and why is there such immediate and blanket condemnation of non-whites? They are not referring to country when they say 'us'. So this immediately highlights where their concern and allegiance stands.

    Further, you must bear in mind that country to them means maintaining the white power structure. To them, America is no longer America without whites as the majority. They view America as a white country, for whites while all other citizens are mere guests in "their land". This is an indisputable position that they hold. A position put on public display when nationalist and republican (redundant) Steve King made his comments about whose babies are needed. These are people who are explicitly biased towards the white race.

    In short, one cannot be an American nationalist without holding views that are adverse towards minorities.
    That is only one bunch on the Right. The far Right also envelopes the Sovereign Citizen movement (very individualistic), various separatist anarchist movements (individuals), some militia movements (small groups loosely organized and includes survivalists), along with various small groups of neo-Nazis. The whole is poorly organized, often at odds with one and other.

    As for diversity, it can be divisive. A nation to be a nation, and coherent society, needs a shared language, cultural and societal norms, and some shared basic expectations. Without those you end up with the biblical / proverbial Tower of Babel. Multiculturalism is divisive. It argues in essence culture doesn't matter because all cultures are the same and equal, simply pick one.

    An American nationalist can easily accommodate minorities. What an American nationalist can't accommodate is someone who expects to live in America, as an American citizen, and not speak a common language, not share common cultural and social values, and basically want to be a citizen but not in any substantial or meaningful way.
    For example, an American nationalist doesn't have an issue with someone who is a Muslim. They would have an issue with a Muslim that insisted on being able to follow Shira Law in totality. Or, someone who speaks some foreign language and expects to be accommodated in every way even as virtually no one understands them. Or, minorities that come or live in America to group into and build "separate but equal" communities because they wish to remain unintegrated into American society.

    So, your whole premise is just wrong. It shows a narrow-minded bias against Whites as well.

    Leave a comment:


  • TactiKill J.
    replied
    Nationalism, to the right today involves the preservation of their desired culture and society. Which for them means a culture free of influence from (probably most specifically) Muslims and diversity in general. For instance, one quote you'll hear often from American nationalists is, "diversity makes us weak". Who is "us" and why is there such immediate and blanket condemnation of non-whites? They are not referring to country when they say 'us'. So this immediately highlights where their concern and allegiance stands.

    Imagine the outrage from said hypocrites if blacks were to state that more whites make 'us' weaker. But, this is a comment that they can get away with due to the privilege of being the majority.

    Further, you must bear in mind that country to them means maintaining the white power structure. To them, America is no longer America without whites as the majority. They view America as a white country, for whites while all other citizens are mere guests in "their land". This is an indisputable position that they hold. A position put on public display when nationalist and republican (redundant) Steve King made his comments about whose babies are needed. These are people who are explicitly biased towards the white race.

    In short, one cannot be an American nationalist without holding views that are adverse towards minorities.

    Hence the importance in making a distinction between nationalists and patriots.
    Last edited by TactiKill J.; 02 Apr 19, 16:15.

    Leave a comment:


  • Imperial
    replied
    Originally posted by ljadw View Post
    In 1933 ,one of the leaders and ideologues of the Iron Guard/Legion Vassile Marin said that political concepts as right, left and extremism had died in Romania and in Europe .They had been replaced by a '' totalitarian view of the natinal life ''which was common for Fascism.Nazism and the Legion .
    Marin said later even that the Legion was an expression of the Left, not of the Far Right .
    When did he say that?
    What he probably said was "we are neither left-wing nor right-wing".


    Marin and the Legion were against the entire spectrum of the democratic political establishment and its ideologies, which they despised, wanted to distance themselves from it and destroy it.
    Also their movement could not remain indifferent to the Romanian workers' problems/demands since they considered them part of the nation. But this interest in the workers' well-being didn't stem from leftist ideology. And it was also a strategy to make the workers less susceptible to leftist propaganda.

    Leave a comment:


  • slick_miester
    replied
    Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post

    If they are legitimate interest and not messing in the interanl affairs of others.
    One man's interest is another man's interference . . . .

    I know that that sounds trite, and to be honest, it is. It can't be denied, however, that Homo sapiens does have a tendency to pursue their interests with all the savagery of moral imperative. Most people firmly believe that "if it's good for me, then it's an absolute good -- and if it's an absolute good, then I'm entitled to pursue it, and pursue it fully." It's pretty scary when you think about it.

    Leave a comment:


  • G David Bock
    replied
    Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post

    Are you sure your not mixing that up with Patriot? Like you I love my country but can admit it isn't perfect.
    Nationalism is a political, social, and economic ideology and movement characterized by the promotion of the interests of a particular nation,[1] especially with the aim of gaining and maintaining the nation's sovereignty (self-governance) over its homeland. Nationalism holds that each nation should govern itself, free from outside interference (self-determination), that a nation is a natural and ideal basis for a polity,[2] and that the nation is the only rightful source of political power (popular sovereignty).[1][3] It further aims to build and maintain a single national identityóbased on shared social characteristics such as culture, language, religion, politics, and belief in a shared singular history[4][5][page needed]óand to promote national unity or solidarity.[1] Nationalism, therefore, seeks to preserve and foster a nation's traditional culture, and cultural revivals have been associated with nationalist movements.[6] It also encourages pride in national achievements, and is closely linked to patriotism.[7][page needed] Nationalism is often combined with other ideologies, such as conservatism (national conservatism) or socialism (socialist nationalism) for example
    ...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalism
    .......................
    Patriotism or national pride is the feeling of love, devotion and sense of attachment to a homeland and alliance with other citizens who share the same sentiment. This attachment can be a combination of many different feelings relating to one's own homeland, including ethnic, cultural, political or historical aspects. It encompasses a set of concepts closely related to, but mutually exclusive from those of nationalism.[1][2][3]

    Some manifestations of patriotism emphasise the "land" element in love for one's native land and use the symbolism of agriculture and the soil[4][5] Ė compare Blut und Boden.
    ...
    An excess of patriotism in the defense of a nation is called chauvinism; another related term is jingoism.

    The English term patriot is first attested in the Elizabethan era; it came via Middle French from Late Latin (6th century) patriota, meaning "countryman", ultimately from Greek, Modern πατριώτης (patriōtēs), meaning 'from the same country', from πατρίς (patris), meaning 'fatherland'.[6] The abstract noun patriotism appears in the early 18th century
    ...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriotism

    Leave a comment:


  • Half Pint John
    replied
    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

    I agree, but I would add that as an American I will put the interests of America ahead of those of other nations.
    If they are legitimate interest and not messing in the interanl affairs of others.

    Leave a comment:


  • Snowshoveler
    replied
    Originally posted by ljadw View Post

    Wrong figure : the KPD got 12.3 % in March 1933 .
    And, the fact that the Nazis got the votes of the nationalists,does not mean that the other parties got the votes of the non nationalists .
    The KPD also opposed Versailles (at the order of the Kremlin ) .
    Iím wrong about the communist vote number but together with the Social Democrats the Left got 30% of the vote thereís not a whole lot of Nationalists that vote for them the Nazis got their votes.

    Leave a comment:


  • ljadw
    replied
    The difference between right wingers in Europe and right wingers in the USA is that the European ones accepred big government easier than in the US . After all, Eueopean nations were constructed by big states .
    Bismarck, not a socialists,increased the power of the Prussian state : railways were state property . The same in Franquist Spain .
    The Third Reich was a special case : there were privatisations in 1933 but also the state Hermann Goering Werke in 1937 .
    Conservatives were in the first row to build the foundations of the Welfare State : Joe and Neville CHamberlain .British coalmines wrere de facto already nationalized before WWII .

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post

    Are you sure your not mixing that up with Patriot? Like you I love my country but can admit it isn't perfect.
    I agree, but I would add that as an American I will put the interests of America ahead of those of other nations.

    Leave a comment:


  • ljadw
    replied
    Originally posted by Snowshoveler View Post

    43% of Germans voted in 1933 for the Nazis 25% voted for the communists the Nazis are who the Nationalists voted for.
    Again big government isnít just the domain of the Left itís usefull by anyone to run a dictatorship with.
    Wrong figure : the KPD got 12.3 % in March 1933 .
    And, the fact that the Nazis got the votes of the nationalists,does not mean that the other parties got the votes of the non nationalists .
    The KPD also opposed Versailles (at the order of the Kremlin ) .

    Leave a comment:


  • Half Pint John
    replied
    Originally posted by Trung Si View Post
    I consider myself a Nationalist. which means I love the USA, nothing else, end of Story!
    Are you sure your not mixing that up with Patriot? Like you I love my country but can admit it isn't perfect.

    Leave a comment:


  • Trung Si
    replied
    I consider myself a Nationalist. which means I love the USA, nothing else, end of Story!

    Leave a comment:


  • Snowshoveler
    replied
    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

    Wrong. The Left uses large government. The Right wants, in the extreme, no government. A good example of someone on the far Right is the Sovereign Citizen movement. That's very much a far Right thing.

    As for what the Nazis / Fascists and Communists wanted. They mostly wanted exactly the same thing.

    Communists wanted true Socialism as an economic system. Fascists were fine with Statist Capitalism. Both are forms of Socialism. The difference is that Communist Socialism had the government controlling both the economy and means of production. Statist Capitalism has the government controlling the economy while the means of production are left in private hands. So in the first, the government runs-- ruins?-- everything, in the second the government runs the economy and companies make what the government tells them to make.

    Both were into life time indoctrination of the masses. From school (today it's "Critical Pedagogy"), to youth organizations (Young Pioneers or Hitler Youth... same thing different name) to vacations...

    Look up Prora. The Nazis did the same thing the Soviets did in making vacation time very much a government run and controlled experience.

    I have no idea why the Left loves trains so much, but they do and both the Nazis and Soviets did that. Public transit for all!

    Volkswagen v. Trabant v. Lada... A crappy car for the masses.

    Fascism and Communism both push for and have nationalized healthcare. The Germans and Italians both had nationalized healthcare under Fascism. While the Fascists used Statist Capitalism for part of their system, it still amounts to "single payer."

    Across the board, only the details change. The Fascists were every bit into big government, centralized control of people's lives, and doing it in more or less the same way as the Communists.

    Read up on the Red Black Alliance sometime

    https://archive.org/stream/RedBlackA...ation_djvu.txt

    Fascists and Communists had more in common than not.
    43% of Germans voted in 1933 for the Nazis 25% voted for the communists the Nazis are who the Nationalists voted for.
    Again big government isnít just the domain of the Left itís usefull by anyone to run a dictatorship with.
    Last edited by Snowshoveler; 19 Mar 19, 18:28.

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    Originally posted by Snowshoveler View Post

    Both sides use a large government to control their people it was and is how that power is being used for what defines them the Soviets and Nazis were in opposite directions in ideology the Soviets provided social services for everyone while the Nazis didnít their only commonality was that they were both authoritarian.
    Wrong. The Left uses large government. The Right wants, in the extreme, no government. A good example of someone on the far Right is the Sovereign Citizen movement. That's very much a far Right thing.

    As for what the Nazis / Fascists and Communists wanted. They mostly wanted exactly the same thing.

    Communists wanted true Socialism as an economic system. Fascists were fine with Statist Capitalism. Both are forms of Socialism. The difference is that Communist Socialism had the government controlling both the economy and means of production. Statist Capitalism has the government controlling the economy while the means of production are left in private hands. So in the first, the government runs-- ruins?-- everything, in the second the government runs the economy and companies make what the government tells them to make.

    Both were into life time indoctrination of the masses. From school (today it's "Critical Pedagogy"), to youth organizations (Young Pioneers or Hitler Youth... same thing different name) to vacations...

    Look up Prora. The Nazis did the same thing the Soviets did in making vacation time very much a government run and controlled experience.

    I have no idea why the Left loves trains so much, but they do and both the Nazis and Soviets did that. Public transit for all!

    Volkswagen v. Trabant v. Lada... A crappy car for the masses.

    Fascism and Communism both push for and have nationalized healthcare. The Germans and Italians both had nationalized healthcare under Fascism. While the Fascists used Statist Capitalism for part of their system, it still amounts to "single payer."

    Across the board, only the details change. The Fascists were every bit into big government, centralized control of people's lives, and doing it in more or less the same way as the Communists.

    Read up on the Red Black Alliance sometime

    https://archive.org/stream/RedBlackA...ation_djvu.txt

    Fascists and Communists had more in common than not.

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X