re: Argument Tip: "Radical Islamic Terrorist" v. "White Supremacist" or "Alt-Right"

You are right, of course!

Also, when using the 'white racist/supremacist' label, it is in conjunction with a parallel argument that whites, as a demographic, are a quickly diminishing segment of the US population. So much so, the argument implies, as to be a 'minority' in the very near future.

This 'white minority' argument contains a kernel of truth in terms of vectoring but the reality is that whites, as a distinct demographic, will still be a majority group for a long time.

IMO, this fallacious 'diminishing argument' is used to augment the strength of the racist/supremacist attack.

The pejorative 'white racist/supremacist' is bad enough and is akin to asking someone 'when did you stop beating your wife like the extremely small percentage of neanderthals in your position do?'

The overarching intent of the 'white racist/supremacist' epithet is to place whites who don't align with a particular political agenda (males, especially) almost immediately in an untenable position of being a racist/supremacist and a diminishing minority slouching toward impotence.

While I am four-square against white nationalist meatheads and their foul racism, I am nevertheless fascinated that so many white people (primarily, but not only, liberals) have fallen for the argument that white people, as a group, are about to fade from moral relevance and perish.

Are whites threatened by open borders that need to be closed/regulated? Yes. Are they attacked and undermined purely on racial and cultural grounds? Yes. Are they fading into oblivion? No.

Finally, are all whites (especially males) racists/supremacists? To those who would believe this, I simply say, Go frick Yourselves.

He's not saying much different he's just saying from high on his horse of crazy.