← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Valley Forge
Thread ID: 7005 | Posts: 19 | Started: 2003-05-30
2003-05-30 18:38 | User Profile
[url=http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=news_members&Number=647566&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=21&part=]Are you a White Race Traitor or a Potential White Nationalist Recruit?[/url]
In this thread, some of the more articulate critics of WN are harping on the idea that White Nationalism is inherently flawed, because it is impossible to define "White." Here are some examples:
**Nationalism is loyalty to a Nation. Being white is not a Nation hence White Nationalism is an inappropriate term. White Pride would be better. Can't call it European either, technically incorrect. Many blonde hair, blue eyed white skinned Russians and Siberians, Ukranians, they aren't European. Argentine women are often mixed bloods, Spaniards (who are mixed with Moors, Blacks, Goths, Celts, Romans. Even Roman legions were mixed - as most legions were fleshed out by recruits from occupied countries ranging from No Africa to Syria to Thrace to England.) Germans, Italians and native tribes.
**Nationalism is a stupid term and concept since there is no such thing as a White Nation, and even the Poles and Germans can't get along, much less Slavs and Germans or French or English.
How can you form a nation, when you cut throats over the world cup in soccer? Or denigrate each other because one is English, the other German and the other French and the other a Slav?
[url=http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=news_members&Number=648210&page=&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=21&vc=1&t=0#Post648210]Link[/url]
**You need to give clearer definitions here.
What exactly is the "white" race? Does it include Slavs, Greeks, Spaniards, Portuguese, and Persians? Hitler didn't think so.. Do you?
What exactly is "white" culture? Does it include both Mozart and Elvis? Sauerkraut and kidney pie? Polkas and Greek dancing? How about blues, jazz, and rock-n-roll?
[url=http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=news_members&Number=648222&page=&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=21&vc=1&t=0#Post648222]Link[/url]
I would like to ask the OD membership -- what do you think of these arguments, and how would you rebut them?
2003-05-30 19:18 | User Profile
I agree that the term "White Nationalism" is worthless, as is the concept. The only place where it can conceivably work is America where the resident Europids are all hybridized into a rather generalized Nordeuropid looking type. Otherwise, it is best to advocate ethnic nationalism among various white ethnics as well as amicable relations among European and European-descended peoples.
2003-05-30 20:28 | User Profile
Merely because that LF poster is unable to perceive "white culture" does not mean that it doesn't exist. He is like the fish that lives its entire life in water, unable to fully appreciate its aquatic environment. However, there are plenty of Blacks, and corporate sensitivity training films, that readily identify "white culture" -- as evil. Many Blacks also laugh at White cultural notions of time and schedule-keeping, excusing the characteristic, chronic tardiness of Blacks as "CPT: Colored People's Time." Columbus Day celebrations, for instance, are another aspect of "white culture" that must be eradicated, in the eyes of non-whites. This LF poster's blindness to "white culture" is akin to that of the student who toured the university: he sat in the classrooms, browsed the libraries, slept in the residence halls, ate in the student union building, met the professors, and spoke with other students, but said he never saw "the university."
As far as White nations, of course they existed and still exist today. In Europe, there are indeed Italians, Russians, and so on. These differences matter. In America, though, the various peoples of Europe accumulated and assimilated, and nicely so, despite the occasional bump, since they had a common genetic and racial heritage. These are the European-Americans (Whites!) of today. They often still self-identify as Irish, for example, especially close to St. Patrick's Day. Many, if not most, European-Americans are blends of the various white ethnicities. That is what we have to work with; it served America well for decades, until the multiracialists clamored to assimilate the unassimilable in the 1960s and threw the gates open to the Third World.
2003-05-30 20:48 | User Profile
OK.
So the White thing is a little fuzzy.
Fine.
White nationalism isn't as workable as Irish nationalism or Greek nationalism.
Got it.
So.
Are you ready for this?
We are members of the White Federation.
Or is that too Star Trekky?
2003-05-30 21:04 | User Profile
When I read the topic and saw the words "Liberty Forum," my first thought was, "Who gives a sh*t?" Actually, that was my second, third, and fourth thought, too. Leave that board to the Islamicists and Libertarians, I say.
Mr. Nuke Buzzcutt: Hey OWK, I have a really cool idea: Neo for president, with Morpheus as running mate! That way, we can get the African-American vote! What do you think?
OWK: Interesting. They can't do any worse than Harry Browne and Art Oliver.
2003-05-30 22:16 | User Profile
VF, maybe you should post a link on LF.
Kurt, you are repeating the Jew argument that whoever opposes them must be an Arab. There are several muslims on LF that openly say so. I don't know if there are some hidden ones, but what makes you think so, the focus on ME instead of the problems faced at home? Perhaps that's the topic perceived to be "safer" among the more timid ones.
2003-05-30 22:50 | User Profile
How did you conclude that most of the anti-Zionist "white nationalists" over at LF are actually Arabs or Muslims posing as such? Is that conjecture on your part, or did they say things to give themselves away? I don't spend much time there, so I'm not starting an argument, I'm just curious why you think this is the case. If that is what's going on, it's hardly unprecedented: over at Free Republic many ADL Jews routinely pose as "all American patriots," "Marines" and "Vietnam vets."
I guess it is largely conjecture. I really don't know; it's just the impression I get. There are some true WNs, like ValleyForge, Franco, and madrussian, but others make me suspicious. There is an overwhelming number of articles dealing with the Israeli/Palestinian situation, but hardly any dealing with other, and imo, more important White issues, such as immigration and racial issues (like you see on OD). And I notice that I rarely see these self-proclaimed "anti-Zionists" (and to me that's another tip-off: they refer to themselves as "anti-Israel" or "anti-Zionist", not anti-Jew, and will sometimes vehemently insist that they are not anti-Jew. I think a true WN would come right out and say, "Hey, I hate Jews!" like they do here, or on Stormfront) at LF rarely post on any threads dealing with immigration or racial issues. Now, I realize that WNs may feel a certain amount of glee when they read about some Arab blowing up some Israelis (the old "the eneny of my enemy is my friend"), but to me, as a White man, they are both non-Whites and don't really mean anything to me. When Arab terrorists aren't killing Jews, they're killing White people (and no, I don't believe every act of Arab terrorism is a Jewish plot). Anyway, maybe I was being a bit of a wiseass with that post; it wasn't directed at VF. I suppose my main beef with LF is that it isn't OD. Still, it isn't FR. ;)
BTW, I like your avatar (wasn't the actor in question recently murdered?) I enjoyed Eraserhead myself, though after Eraserhead and the Elephant Man Lynch went steadily downhill by producing superficial but pretentious Generation-X claptrap rather than serious movies.
Thanks. Yes. His name was Jack Nance. He died in 1996 at the age of 53, in Pasedena. He was found dead in his home after being beaten by two young men described as "Latinos."
Yeah, David Lynch's career is kind of a mixed bag. Like most artists, his early work was best, though I pretty much liked everything he did (fwiw VNN seems to think of him as some kind of honorary White Nationalist). I do remember Lynch being on The Tonight Show with Leno once, talking about living in some miserable Philadelphia ghetto (which was where he come up with the idea for Eraserhead), before he hit it big. He was saying that it was a Black neighborhood, and the cops were there like every night, and what a nightmare it was. I noticed Jay started squirming a bit, and was trying to change the subject, but Lynch kept going on about it. It was kind of funny. :D
2003-05-30 22:56 | User Profile
Octopod:
**Valley Forge:
I glanced over the thread, and noticed that you've already borrowed one of my phrases I used in a debate with you**
I am actually indebted to many members of OD and the old SFOF forum for many of the arguments and retorts I use both in the real world and in cyber-space, especially AY and PaleoconAvatar.
Kurt:
When I read the topic and saw the words "Liberty Forum," my first thought was, "Who gives a sh*t?" Actually, that was my second, third, and fourth thought, too. Leave that board to the Islamicists and Libertarians, I say.
Personally, I enjoy posting at LF, because it gives me an opportunity to mix it up with people who don't share our world view. Here at OD, in contrast, I hardly ever see anything to disagree with.
2003-05-30 23:00 | User Profile
The "anti-Zionists" on LF aren't trying to pass themselves off as WN. They are what they say they are - just anti-Zionists.
2003-05-30 23:01 | User Profile
Kurt, you are repeating the Jew argument that whoever opposes them must be an Arab. There are several muslims on LF that openly say so. I don't know if there are some hidden ones, but what makes you think so, the focus on ME instead of the problems faced at home? Perhaps that's the topic perceived to be "safer" among the more timid ones.
I don't know if there are some hidden ones, but what makes you think so, the focus on ME instead of the problems faced at home?
That's what it is. Like I said in my post to AY, I prefer topics dealing with immigration and racial issues, and I don't really care about what goes on in the ME since the people involved are not my. You may have a point about some Whites preferring to talk about ME issues because they feel it's safer.
2003-05-30 23:07 | User Profile
Originally posted by AntiYuppie@May 30 2003, 19:03 Why is it that whenever we get some opponent of paleoconservatism or white nationalism coming over here, it's always of the former (disruptor) variety rather somebody more intelligent and constructive?
Because all the intelligent and constructive people already see the merits of our arguments, and are thus our registered posters or loyal lurkers. And the second-tier pretenders who oppose us read our threads and know we'd kick their rears in debate, so they're smart enough not to even bother. Hence, the trolls are the only leftovers who go rushing in where (angels?) fear to tread.
2003-06-03 04:25 | User Profile
[color=green][SIZE=3]Until A Better Term Comes Along...[/color][/SIZE]
Until a better term comes along, using the expression "white nationalism" comes closest to what white nationalists want - an all-white (or nearly so) America.
The very word "nationalism" is defined as loyalty to a nation and since America was founded by whites, today's racially-aware whites are indeed "white nationalists", since they wish to preserve that which was originally created by our Founding Fathers - a New World nation for Europeans - and only Europeans.
As for who is white, there will never be a clear-cut demarcation line, any more than there is a clear-cut demarcation line separating the waters of the Pacific from the waters of the Atlantic. Even without such a line, however, we have a sufficiently accurate idea of what constitutes the Pacific Ocean and what constitutes the Atlantic. Likewise with Caucasians - we know our own kind when we see them, and the occasional person who has "hazy" Caucasian features should be of no great concern. If we give them the benefit of the doubt and accept them as white, the greater genetic body of those unquestionably white will not be affected to any substantial degree.
David Lane answered this better here, I [url=http://www.nsec-88.org/clanky/who_is_white.html]believe:[/url]
2003-06-03 04:36 | User Profile
As for who is white, there will never be a clear-cut demarcation line, any more than there is a clear-cut demarcation line separating the waters of the Pacific from the waters of the Atlantic. Even without such a line, however, we have a sufficiently accurate idea of what constitutes the Pacific Ocean and what constitutes the Atlantic.
That's a cool analogy. I think I'll steal it from you and use it the next time some liberal skeptic thinks he's got me in a corner when he asks me to "define who Whites are." :lol: Sometimes I tell people that it seems the non-whites have no problem figuring out who "Whitey" is when they target him for their attacks (both physical and political).
2003-06-03 04:57 | User Profile
Originally posted by PaleoconAvatar@Jun 2 2003, 22:36 > As for who is white, there will never be a clear-cut demarcation line, any more than there is a clear-cut demarcation line separating the waters of the Pacific from the waters of the Atlantic. Even without such a line, however, we have a sufficiently accurate idea of what constitutes the Pacific Ocean and what constitutes the Atlantic.**
That's a cool analogy. I think I'll steal it from you and use it the next time some liberal skeptic thinks he's got me in a corner when he asks me to "define who Whites are." :lol: Sometimes I tell people that it seems the non-whites have no problem figuring out who "Whitey" is when they target him for their attacks (both physical and political).**
You can expand on the analogies further.
There are no clear boundaries between different languages and dialects - yet no one denies that languages exist. The only reason why we have "Portuguese" as an accepted language, rather than a mere dialect or regional language of Spain, is because Portugal remained free of Spain. "Scotts" would today be a totally alien language to English if the Scottish and English kingdoms had not been united. Italy and France have many mutually incomprehsible dialects; they are only "unified" on the politically enforced fiction that Parisian French is "real" French and that Tuscan Italian is "real" Italian. Languages have many "border regions" between each, without eliminating the concept of seperate languages.
You can pull this same analogy with class - try telling a Marxist that classes don't exist "because" there are no clear and obvious discrete boundaries between the classes.
And of course, color itself doesn't exist, since "color" is just a series of "arbitrary" divisions along the visible spectrum of light, each color merging imperceptably into the next on the spectrum.
2003-06-03 05:30 | User Profile
In other words, those are primitive rhetorical devices that despite being primitive and obvious ploys have worked wonders on the brainwashed sheeple. But what can you expect if very few understand and use the scientific principles of investigation and analysis? False paradoxes are the prefered weapons of internet trolls and your opponents; they have to use them because they have no leg to stand on.
2003-06-04 16:20 | User Profile
Tom, I like the ocean analogy.
Here's another spin on it: ocean currents don't have precise boundaries, but the mariner who ignores them puts his life in jeopardy.
2003-06-05 00:19 | User Profile
I never knew there were parts of the Ukraine not in Europe. Somebody give this guy a globe to look at. Anyway, these clowns are debating about words, not ideas.
2003-06-05 01:55 | User Profile
W.R.I.T.O.S, I like your post. Sums it all up in the first two sentences.
To be honest, I can only stand to lurk at LF for 20 - 25 minutes, then I have to move on before the ignorance displayed makes me put a size 12 through the monitor. Of course, I'm not remarking about the fine OD members who also post there, but the bulk of that crowd rubs me the wrong way.
2003-06-09 19:48 | User Profile
Yes, there is an element of sophistry in the objections to "White Nationalism", but it may also be true that the term does not aptly reflect the nature of the thing. The impetus for White Nationalism is an attack on "whites" (or, to use Earl Raab's term, "Aryans") as such. "White Nationalism" is properly conceptualized as the movement dedicated to securing the survival and autonomy of the "whites" who have been targeted. "White Nationalism" does not clearly convey this fact, but alternatives seem unwieldy or inelegant.