I strongly object to that idea, since many cultures that are important to preserve are in no way “white.” I also object to the tendency, evident here, to shut down discussion with labels rather than discuss issues that are as complicated and fraught as culture and immigration. But this isn’t even the thread for that, so this feels more like people here are trying to take pot-shots at me out-of-context without any interest in further discussion on the topic.
Seriously, I dared to mention the Iran deal in this thread, and got shouted out and told to take it elsewhere. And yet here is half the forum trying to misrepresent my views on race and culture with a label, rather than engage with it or ignore it (both of which are better options).
When I Google cultural suicide the top result are from conservative (generally anti-trump) publications like National Review, and the Weekly Standard, and not alt-right places.
The argument Gman makes echo the arguments in those publications. Now, I’m a big fan of immigration so I reflexively dismiss the sky is falling our culture is disappearing. That said I’m not European (I don’t believe you are either correct?) and haven’t been to the place in 25 years. So I’m really not in a place to judge, European immigration policies. (The US is confusing enough) But it seems to me you are arguing that anybody who says that immigrants to Europe need to assimilate is a racist. That is a radical definition of a white supremacy, IMO.
The idea that letting in a few immigrants is dangerous to the majority “culture” is very strongly tied to white nationalism, but I’ll agree that in other places it is an argument used by equally racist non-white nationalists.
Listen am not saying you are a racist, but your comments and rationales make it seems like you have been breathing their exhaust a bit.
We’re in the wrong thread for it, so that’s all I’ll say. Happy to talk about it in the immigration thread though. @ me there.
More specifically you said a bunch of untrue things and then refused to take it to the correct thread. Happy to talk about it over there whenever you are ready.
Well, The Southern Poverty Law Center kinda disagrees with you. Gman also talks about declining white birth rates.
Adherents of white nationalist groups believe that white identity should be the organizing principle of the countries that make up Western civilization. White nationalists advocate for policies to reverse changing demographics and the loss of an absolute, white majority. Ending non-white immigration, both legal and illegal, is an urgent priority — frequently elevated over other racist projects, such as ending multiculturalism and miscegenation — for white nationalists seeking to preserve white, racial hegemony.
In addition to their obsession with declining white birth rates, these themes comprise some of the most powerful propaganda that animates and drives the white nationalist movement. Adherents frequently cite Pat Buchanan’s 2001 book, The Death of the West, which argues that these declining white birth rates and an “immigrant invasion” will transform the United States into a third world nation by 2050, as the text responsible for their awakening, or “red pill.”
It’s definitely not a white supremacist term, because as I mentioned, it does not imply in any way that any one culture, or race, is superior to another. The book I mentioned earlier that advanced the concept of cultural suicide in Europe is not a white supremacist book, and as you referred to, it was written up in National Review – hardly a white supremacist magazine.
This is a badge of honor. Southern Poverty Law Center is a horrible organization, and a true propaganda outfit. It is essentially a scam that profits off its own brand of fear-mongering and irresponsible slander. Regardless, why do you think mentioning “cultural suicide” reveals a white supremacist ideology? Culture has nothing necessarily to do with race, even if the culture is predominately white. Maybe take it to the immigration thread if you want to engage in a debate, rather than just drop labels and insult me, as other posted have suggested.
Southern Poverty Law Center is a political tool, and my primary opposition to them is labeling people as Islamophobes who clearly are not. Such as Ayaan hirsi ali, who is Muslim; Maajid Nawaz (who is suing SPLC); Sam Harris, etc. They simply have no credibility. They have jumped the shark of liberal hysteria, sort of like some people here. They slander people, which is reprehensible.
Here are some good resources on SPLC, from Politico and NR:
Saying that the SPLC had no credibility, especially when using a source that describes them as, “a civil rights stalwart” is kind of absurd.
If they overstepped in a few cases, that doesn’t change the fact that the vast majority of the folks they fight against are in fact terrible, terrible people.
When they slander multiple Muslims as Islamophobic, which is a serious charge, they lose credibility. I know people here love to throw out terms like “racist” and “white nationalist,” because it’s the internet and they’re anonymous and angry, but responsible organizations don’t do it. Period.
