I apparently think there are far less of those types of people than you do. Interesting.The set of everything is a pretty big set to keep tabs on.
I apparently think there are far less of those types of people than you do. Interesting.The set of everything is a pretty big set to keep tabs on.
I have heard of people who think this. Again, I disagree. Both schools of thought are flawed. I have negative views of both.Would you be surprised I have no real negative opinion of black nationalism or white nationalism.
SOME are ALWAYS looking to be offended and ALWAYS will find SOMETHING to be offended about.I remember a time when the term "Negro" was acceptable as in "United Negro Collage Fund" until it wasn't. I don't think anyone here is genuinely looking to offend anyone. Case in point the mention of the word "Maroon" is supposedly an offensive slur that a lot of people weren't even aware of until it was pointed out by someone, unnecessarily IMO, because it was never intended to be used a such.
The definitions are different enough that they don't mean the same things, but I'd wager they're both attributes common to WS or WN.One believe white people are superior, flat out.
The other wants to advance white interests in a world that seeks to do everything possible to subvert it.
They're pretty different things to me.
There's really no advantage to having a nation comprised of exactly one race. In terms of compatibility it's the culture and belief system that tend to make groups of people clash.Would you be surprised I have no real negative opinion of black nationalism or white nationalism.
Everyone wants their interests served, nothing wrong with it.
Facts!SOME are ALWAYS looking to be offended and ALWAYS will find SOMETHING to be offended about.
I don't think you understand. I wasn't referring to types of people. I was referring to the set of everything that is considered racist. I mean, you look at all the symbols ADL says are racist and it's just about too much to track.I apparently think there are far less of those types of people than you do. Interesting.
I use them interchangeably. I see no difference. None.
Demonstrations over the weekend in Charlottesville, Virginia, that resulted in violence and death were described in news reports in different ways. Some called one group of demonstrators “white nationalists.” Others call that same group “white supremacists.” Some used both terms in the same article.
Those terms mean two different things, though they are in the same family.
A “supremacist” believes a particular race (or sex, or other genetic or cultural characteristic) is naturally superior to others. Because you must know what the characteristic is that is believed to be “supreme,” an adjective has to be attached. Thus there are “white supremacists"
A “nationalist,” though, is at heart merely someone who strongly believes in the interest of one’s own nation, however “nation” might be defined. But adding an adjective to indicate what “their” nation is can turn “nationalism” into a polarizing term. A “white nationalist” generally wants a nation of white people.
I agree. My everyday interactions with all races has always been positive. There is a very few that F it up for everybody.There's really no advantage to having a nation comprised of exactly one race. In terms of compatibility it's the culture and belief system that tend to make groups of people clash.
{all things considered racist} ∩ {all things} == {all things}I don't think you understand. I wasn't referring to types of people. I was referring to the set of everything that is considered racist. I mean, you look at all the symbols ADL says are racist and it's just about too much to track.
I prefer just plain ol' "nationalist". I want America to be the first priority for Americans. That's why I liked and supported Trump. I don't want America to be "different" for this group or that group. I want everyone to have the same opportunity. Whether or not they choose to take advantage of that opportunity is of no concern to me.Would you be surprised I have no real negative opinion of black nationalism or white nationalism.
Everyone wants their interests served, nothing wrong with it.
White supremacist believes in racial superiority but lacks territorial ambitionsI still see no difference Bug.
Why do WNs want a White "homeland?" The answer to that question explains why I see there being no difference between the two. Trying to be clever and finding "alternative" reasons is intellectually dishonest. We all know why.White supremacist believes in racial superiority but lacks territorial ambitions
The other does not necessarily believe in racial superiority but wishes to have a white 'homeland' so does have territorial ambitions
There is likely some degree of overlap between the two groups
I see all this racial angst in a very few places, with a very few people. Even last summer, if we take a step back and look not at the legitimate protests, but at the rioting and violence- it was a very few people. The academics and media who buy fully into Critical Race Theory- very few people, regardless of the picture that the major media wants to paint.I agree. My everyday interactions with all races has always been positive. There is a very few that F it up for everybody.
...and WN isn't WS? I'm trying to wrap my head around what you just said, and you not realizing "what".... you just said.White nationalists want a homeland for the same reason black nationalists do. They see the 'other' as unfixable and seek to seperate themselves from the problems they perceive them to be responsible for
Should I understand this to work toward a distinction between a White Nationalist and a nationalist who so happens to be white?Why do WNs want a White "homeland?" The answer to that question explains why I see there being no difference between the two. Trying to be clever and finding "alternative" reasons is intellectually dishonest. We all know why.