White Supremacy discussion thread

[Senkaku]

Number one- Yes I knew white supremacists existed, I've read all about them, and I am most fascinated by the Nazis. I must care about their views at least a little to spend countless hours on their beliefs, history, and the spread of their ideas.

Pro tip: the Nazis are not worth spending countless hours on, especially their schizophrenic trash heap of ideology and theory. Find something better to do with your time. I hear pottery is fun.

In fact, to learn anything at all, you must care at least somewhat about that particular subject (in this case hate groups).

I've learned a lot of things without needing to care about Nazism.

My point is we shouldn't try to convert white supremacists and hate groups to not hate anymore (hate is a forever issue). It is signed about coexistence between the two groups, no matter how much they hate each other. Perfecting is not my goal, rather it is awareness and a slightly better world.

You cannot co-exist with people who want to dispossess and murder you. Sorry. I know you want everyone to just get along despite their differences or whatever, but Mom and Dad aren't getting back together.

[Nakena]

My point is we shouldn't try to convert white supremacists and hate groups to not hate anymore (hate is a forever issue).

Thats where you are wrong.

[Darle Barrroda]

Why would you stoop to their level and do the same thing they have done to you?

I'm not actually trying to fucking kill people, what the hell!?

How am I in any way stooping to that level? There's a huge difference between "I will not tolerate your political viewpoint" and "I will kill you for believing in something different than me."

I ment by silencing them.

[Western Fardelshufflestein]

Me, a white person: Wait, "white" is capitalized?

[Diarcesia]

On my personal quest to learn more about the beautiful world we live on, I have come across so many interesting people, from Communists to Liberal socialists, democratic centrists, nationalists, fascists, and liberals. But a group of people that I have failed to have seen is a white supremacist. That was until today.





So that got me thinking, I am not someone that knows the full ideology and beliefs of white supremacy (I’m more well knowledgeable on the KKK) and I believe we should listen to everybody idea’s no matter how much we hate them or despise them. So the purpose of this thread is to do the following

Discuss issues pertaining to White supremacy and White nationalism

Gain a full and whole idea of what white supremacy is and what it isn't

To bridge the gap between white supremacists and anti-white supremacists

To have civil debates and conservations on the values and tenets of White supremacy (and why or why not you believe it is flawed)



To get things straight I am no white supremacist myself, I am rather a person interested in hearing in what they have to say. I believe everybody regardless of how hateful I think their views may be, must be able to voice their opinion without harsh backlash.

That being said, I know how fast things can get out of hand these days, so make sure to keep it civil, and follow NS rules.

What white supremacists don't realize is that their "supremacy", perceived or actual, is evitable. Gunpowder and industry gave them a massive advantage, and so they get over their heads and attribute it to their intrinsic traits.

[Cartheen]

Why would you stoop to their level and do the same thing they have done to you?

I'm not actually trying to fucking kill people, what the hell!?

How am I in any way stooping to that level? There's a huge difference between "I will not tolerate your political viewpoint" and "I will kill you for believing in something different than me."

By stoop to their level I mean to suppress speech. Obviously you're not going as far down as killing someone, but you're still lowering freedom of speech nonetheless.

[Vorausen]

Why did you inflict this on us? You do understand kids come on this forum, right? You thought it'd be a bright idea to send up a flare to every far-right poster on the site saying "hey, come post as many racist screeds and innuendos as you want"? Now we're going to have 14-year-olds Googling shit they don't understand, having algorithms push them onto much scarier websites than this one, and going down the right-wing rabbit hole. Nice job.

Everything these days is supposedly for "the sake of the children" and lets just say I'm sick of it. Children shouldn't be online anyways, unless they're using a device that is sufficiently locked down thats owned by their school or whatever. That tends to be the case now. For youths who do get complete online access and get left to their own devices, they inevitably get exposed to stuff they're not supposed to see legally, or do stuff like lie about their age to bypass the age gate various websites have and so on.

I've known about Nazism and what it stood for since I was 8. We should be teaching our children the dangers of such hateful groups, but not necessarily banning such content. If the child sees that content, that is then the parent's fault for not properly monitoring them. Parents have to take ownership and not blame it on people like me.

[The Reformed American Republic]

...prominent white supremacists in major media organizations who would try to manufacture such nonsense.

Maybe in Fox News, but not really in most of the major media places. Most media outlets are all for such suppression of white supremacist ideas.

[Islamic Holy Sites]

I'm not actually trying to fucking kill people, what the hell!?

How am I in any way stooping to that level? There's a huge difference between "I will not tolerate your political viewpoint" and "I will kill you for believing in something different than me."

By stoop to their level I mean to suppress speech. Obviously you're not going as far down as killing someone, but you're still lowering freedom of speech nonetheless.

It depends on what you mean. If you mean stopping people spewing ridiculous lies and hate speech, I'd be happy.

[Tsaivao]

I'm not actually trying to fucking kill people, what the hell!?

How am I in any way stooping to that level? There's a huge difference between "I will not tolerate your political viewpoint" and "I will kill you for believing in something different than me."

By stoop to their level I mean to suppress speech. Obviously you're not going as far down as killing someone, but you're still lowering freedom of speech nonetheless.

So by not listening to people I disagree with, that makes me a bad person, and more importantly I'd be considered as bad or worse than the people who support ethnic/racial cleansing

Yeah, I'm done here in this thread. I really don't want to waste my time here anymore.

And for the record, yes. I do want to restrict free speech, if it means that white supremacy is quelled. Deal with it.

[Western Fardelshufflestein]

Everything these days is supposedly for "the sake of the children" and lets just say I'm sick of it. Children shouldn't be online anyways, unless they're using a device that is sufficiently locked down thats owned by their school or whatever. That tends to be the case now. For youths who do get complete online access and get left to their own devices, they inevitably get exposed to stuff they're not supposed to see legally, or do stuff like lie about their age to bypass the age gate various websites have and so on.

I've known about Nazism and what it stood for since I was 8. We should be teaching our children the dangers of such hateful groups, but not necessarily banning such content. If the child sees that content, that is then the parent's fault for not properly monitoring them. Parents have to take ownership and not blame it on people like me.

If we teach kids that such hatred is inherently evil, they can grow up to understand that hating groups of people for things like religion/race/etc. is never okay.

[Senkaku]

No, it means they won't be able to passively radicalize huge numbers of people via the media and their organizational capacity will be massively disrupted.

Well, neither of us really have any evidence, as it is based on a theory, so let’s just agree to disagree, since that’s the only thing we can do.

There are vast heaps and mountains of evidence, which Kowani has been trying to wave in front of you and which you are apparently uninterested in.

Did this happen with Communists during the Red Scare?

This is quite literally what is currently happening with many online communities at the moment. Most online spaces that call themselves communists cite many communist movements of the 1900s being unfairly silenced as part of their motivation to become communist.

...that's why you think people become communists?

Why did you inflict this on us? You do understand kids come on this forum, right? You thought it'd be a bright idea to send up a flare to every far-right poster on the site saying "hey, come post as many racist screeds and innuendos as you want"? Now we're going to have 14-year-olds Googling shit they don't understand, having algorithms push them onto much scarier websites than this one, and going down the right-wing rabbit hole. Nice job.

Everything these days is supposedly for "the sake of the children" and lets just say I'm sick of it. Children shouldn't be online anyways, unless they're using a device that is sufficiently locked down thats owned by their school or whatever. That tends to be the case now. For youths who do get complete online access and get left to their own devices, they inevitably get exposed to stuff they're not supposed to see legally, or do stuff like lie about their age to bypass the age gate various websites have and so on.

NS is explicitly for ages 13 and up. I'm sorry your issues with kids run so deep or whatever, but banning children from the Internet is not yet a reality, so my point stands that OP should've thought this through a little better.

This sounds like a reasonable idea, but it isn't borne out in the real world. Sorry. Suppression and censorship are in fact very effective tools, that's why states have used them since antiquity to crush movements they don't like.

"Crush movements they don't like" eh? Sounds way too close to Nazi Germany, Communist China, the USSR, modern-day Russia, North Korea.... apparently, they are shining beacons of freedom right?

...how old are you?

This sounds like a reasonable idea, but it isn't borne out in the real world. Sorry. Suppression and censorship are in fact very effective tools, that's why states have used them since antiquity to crush movements they don't like.

Effective, but not good, if we want to distance ourselves from the Nazis, then we shouldn’t act like them.

Suppressing speech is not and will never be equivalent to genocide. Nazis use forks and knives, too, are you going to just rip into the next steak you eat with your bare hands? News flash: all states suppress certain types of speech. Selective freedom of expression is not the key distinction between Nazis and non-Nazis.

[Cartheen]

Yes, and I believe hate speech should be allowed as long as no threat of violence or attempts to organize violence are made.

Hate speech is literally designed to harass people. That's what hate speech is, a form of harassment, which itself is a form of violence. How can ANYONE justify calling someone the n-word and be lie "well, he didn't punch him, so it's okay"!?

"[group] is inferior" is hate speech but not harassment. Harassment is defined as aggressive pressure or intimidation. Saying you hate a group or insulting them is not harassment. Calling someone repeatedly to tell them to kill themselves, or to insult them, most definitely is.

All racial harassment is hate speech but not all hate speech is harassment.

[Vorausen]

Number one- Yes I knew white supremacists existed, I've read all about them, and I am most fascinated by the Nazis. I must care about their views at least a little to spend countless hours on their beliefs, history, and the spread of their ideas.

Pro tip: the Nazis are not worth spending countless hours on, especially their schizophrenic trash heap of ideology and theory. Find something better to do with your time. I hear pottery is fun.

In fact, to learn anything at all, you must care at least somewhat about that particular subject (in this case hate groups).

I've learned a lot of things without needing to care about Nazism.

My point is we shouldn't try to convert white supremacists and hate groups to not hate anymore (hate is a forever issue). It is signed about coexistence between the two groups, no matter how much they hate each other. Perfecting is not my goal, rather it is awareness and a slightly better world.

You cannot co-exist with people who want to dispossess and murder you. Sorry. I know you want everyone to just get along despite their differences or whatever, but Mom and Dad aren't getting back together.

Never said you needed to care about nazism to learn anything. Instead, I said, "To learn anything you must care about the thing you are learning about".

Unless of course, I want to be ignorant and fall into the beliefs of these hate groups because I didn't know what they stood for and hey I kind of agree with them on some issues. And there I go down the rabbit hole.

My point is we shouldn't try to convert white supremacists and hate groups to not hate anymore (hate is a forever issue).

Thats where you are wrong.

So force them to not be racist and if they don't accept "my help" let's imprison and punish them. Sounds logical

[Cartheen]

This is quite literally what is currently happening with many online communities at the moment. Most online spaces that call themselves communists cite many communist movements of the 1900s being unfairly silenced as part of their motivation to become communist.

...that's why you think people become communists?

Framing "this is cited by many people as one of the reasons they became communist" as "this is the only reason people follow communism" is a blatant strawman argument.

[Western Theram]

what do you do when their views are completely disconnected from reality? i mean its funny to laugh a jewish space laser conspiracy theories but people actually believe shit like that and its sad. what do you do when they aren't iterested in discussion but just trying to repeat their dog-whistle over and over and over again despite all the evidence that they're wrong? if you think they deserve to be there as much as anyone else that dog-whistle will spread much more quickly and radically then i wold had they NOT had a platform. we see this with the q crap. social media sites were really slow to investigate these groups what they were saying and look what happened. deplatforming wont get rid of intolerance overall but it would definitely help

[The Reformed American Republic]

[Redacted, misread]

[Kowani]

No, it means they won't be able to passively radicalize huge numbers of people via the media and their organizational capacity will be massively disrupted.

Well, neither of us really have any evidence, as it is based on a theory, so let’s just agree to disagree, since that’s the only thing we can do.

One problem
We do have evidence
Quite a bit of it

[Islamic Holy Sites]

Hate speech is literally designed to harass people. That's what hate speech is, a form of harassment, which itself is a form of violence. How can ANYONE justify calling someone the n-word and be lie "well, he didn't punch him, so it's okay"!?

"[group] is inferior" is hate speech but not harassment. Harassment is defined as aggressive pressure or intimidation. Saying you hate a group or insulting them is not harassment. Calling someone repeatedly to tell them to kill themselves, or to insult them, most definitely is.

All racial harassment is hate speech but not all hate speech is harassment.

They basically say 'Blacks are inferior and stupid who we will kill'. That certainly is harrassment, and the day I won't believe that is when hell freezes over.

[Vorausen]

I've known about Nazism and what it stood for since I was 8. We should be teaching our children the dangers of such hateful groups, but not necessarily banning such content. If the child sees that content, that is then the parent's fault for not properly monitoring them. Parents have to take ownership and not blame it on people like me.

If we teach kids that such hatred is inherently evil, they can grow up to understand that hating groups of people for things like religion/race/etc. is never okay.

This is true, it is up to parents and someone's guardians (and society as a whole) to enforce standards rather than the government. It is a liberal-free mentality.

[Atheris]

The day of reckoning is upon us.

On a more serious note, I do believe white supremacists should be allowed to say their views solely because it's the easiest way to discredit them. History has shown that when an ideology is pushed underground it will only become more widespread because there would be no one to discredit it - this was shown with Christianity in the Roman Empire and communism in Russia (and especially China), for example. The best way to turn people away from ideologies like white supremacy and Nazism is to have a platform to openly discredit it, something that can't be done if you force it underground.

[Senkaku]

Everything these days is supposedly for "the sake of the children" and lets just say I'm sick of it. Children shouldn't be online anyways, unless they're using a device that is sufficiently locked down thats owned by their school or whatever. That tends to be the case now. For youths who do get complete online access and get left to their own devices, they inevitably get exposed to stuff they're not supposed to see legally, or do stuff like lie about their age to bypass the age gate various websites have and so on.

I've known about Nazism and what it stood for since I was 8. We should be teaching our children the dangers of such hateful groups, but not necessarily banning such content. If the child sees that content, that is then the parent's fault for not properly monitoring them. Parents have to take ownership and not blame it on people like me.

"Parents must impose panopticon-level surveillance conditions on their children to prevent them from seeing content I am complicit in producing and directing people to" is quite a take.

Me, a white person: Wait, "white" is capitalized?

A lot of far-right types started doing that as a reaction to some major news outlets changing their style guides to capitalize "Black," a decision I do not want to get into the history of right now. It's not generally capitalized outside of the style manual of the Daily Stormer.

[Cartheen]

By stoop to their level I mean to suppress speech. Obviously you're not going as far down as killing someone, but you're still lowering freedom of speech nonetheless.

It depends on what you mean. If you mean stopping people spewing ridiculous lies and hate speech, I'd be happy.

If they're not harassing anyone or threatening violence/organizing violence there is no fair reason to silence them.

[Nakena]

Thats where you are wrong.

So force them to not be racist and if they don't accept "my help" let's imprison and punish them. Sounds logical

Lol no.

[Vorausen]

So force them to not be racist and if they don't accept "my help" let's imprison and punish them. Sounds logical

Lol no.

Then what is your solution, because from the looks of things you are saying and pointing out lots of problems with having a free and liberal country, with free speech.