re: Are you a nationalist?

quote:

---

There are more than a few thousand that are upset about the fact that we won't be majority white

---

Show me a majority non-White place you want to live.

Mexico? Zimbabwe? Wuhan?

quote:

---

The KKK is fringe. These nuts are starting to attain real political influence.

---

Where? Name the place they have any political influence whatsoever?

quote:

---

When did Nationalist and racist start meaning the same thing?

---

There's actually a wealth of information on this transformation. I believe Samuel Huntington (or someone else, I can't remember at the moment) argues that the source of modern reactionary movements is dated to the Civil Rights movement and the immigration acts of the 60s. The term "white nationalist" was used first in the US in 1951 or 52, and gained popularity in the late 70s and 80s, with a number of neo-volkisch groups using the term to describe themselves, which ranged from the reactionary (such as the European New Right) to pagan (such as the Church of Creativity) to neo-Nazi.

In the academic literature of the 90s, white nationalism is used to specifically discuss these groups that called for a nation-state based on race alone, such as the Northwest Front of Harold Covington, among others.

In the internet era, there hasn't been enough delineation and discussion of the history of the term, as it doesn't mean people who are white and are patriotic (i.e. want what is best for their country, etc.), and now people who aren't familiar with the history of the specific terms might feel as though it is an attack on them though they have no association with the reactionary philosophies that the term "white nationalist" specifically describes.

The history of black nationalism and separatism has a similarly deep catalog of information, but the conflation with race did not develop there, as the major groups like the NOI defined themselves as black separatists, not black nationalists, if I recall.

quote:

---

I am an American. I put America and Americans first. At all costs.

---

Leftists agree with you. That's why they want to import the poorest, sickest and most illiterate from Central and South America to live here in the USA and vote Democrat.

I am a nationalist in favor of the USA. However, hypothetically, if the USA becomes an entity of Leftist Globalist repression of free citizens, I will no longer be a nationalist for the USA.

quote:

---

I'd put the number at at least 10 million It's a relatively common theme here on this forum

---

I'm gonna have to disagree with you here on both accounts. Even if that number was correct that's still a very low percentage of Americans. The Liberal media would have us believe it was in the 100 million range.

There are way more people in this country that supports communist/extreme left views than those that support extreme Nationalism. Those are the one we should all be very worried about.

quote:

---

Yes. The reason is that people who HATE the nationalism I described have successfully attached it to the stuff you describe by giving it the same word as part of the description.

---

But the notions of ethnic nationalism are older and developed from the Peace of Westphalia, where the notion of self-determination for a group of people began in earnest (at least in this time period). The notion that you want a leader of a nation to represent you is specifically based on the notion of a nation-state, and that didn't develop in earnest until after 1648. The imperial system was still predominant until the 20th century, and was a system based on self-preservation, and thus was more interested in tax receipts and funding the crown than it was interfering with local politics, which is one reason why former imperial entities, such as Russia, Turkey, and Iran, all spent the 20's and 30's on building infrastructure projects that imperial polities saw no need to complete, thus leaving all three nations (and all post-imperial nations) behind the Western powers.

quote:

---

Again, this is the insidiousness of language.

---

It's also acting as though words are ahistorical, which they are not. Nationalism in academic terms is defined to mean exactly as I described earlier, as a ethnic movement to building a nation-state around a central language, religion, and ethnicity, as a response to the imperial system. When historians discuss notions of Romantic nationalism, they are discussing something specific, and hence there is a descriptor to differentiate it with what was the set notion of nationalism.

quote:

---

There are people who do NOT want citizens to put their countries first. So, they've taken a completely normal natural common sense concept, and then, attached it to many hyphenated versions to soil the original natural common sense concept.

---

Again, this isn't how the term developed. The origins of the term specifically reference the 1711 definition of "one devoted to his nation" from the French term. But the context of that origin is that in 1711, the imperial system was predominant, and thus the notion of the "nation" was in its infancy, as was the notion of citizenship. It is anachronistic to assume it is the other way around, that the hyphenations came after its association with patriotism. That isn't true by any stretch of the imagination.

quote:

---

You understand what groups started using the "white" descriptor, right? Who is this they you are referring to?

---

We live in a world where a bunch of people on reddit successfully FIRST, convinced non-racists that the fricking OK sign was a "racist" symbol and THEN...…...eventually, actual racists started using it!

You greatly underestimate how easy it is to manipulate the language in culture to the effect you want.

It's not some grand accident that there are virtually ZERO hyphenated normal left into disgusting left terms.

quote:

---

You greatly underestimate how easy it is to manipulate the language in culture to the effect you want.

---

I'm not underestimating anything. I'm asking who you think used the term first. There is a right and wrong answer. I've already delineated why scholars used the term. So I ask again. What groups do you think started using the "white" descriptor?

quote:

---

It's not some grand accident that there are virtually ZERO hyphenated normal left into disgusting left terms.

---

This isn't true either. Democratic socialist and Marxist-Leninism is a prime example. One came from workers movements in Scandanavia in the 1910s and 20s, and the other came from the First Internationale in 1880 and then from Lenin's writings in the 1910s. Each with distinct, identifiable histories, treated as though they are the same thing.

quote:

---

crazy4lsu

---

You are very patient. Much more so than I. Kudos.