What do white nationalists mean by "Defend our culture"?

[Suriyanakhon]

“Culture” is a buzzword for racial purity because white nationalists know their message is deeply unpopular and has to be dressed up to be remotely socially acceptable. It's the reason they regard a bunch of Spanish speaking Catholics as non-Western, because culture to them is just race.

[Erythrean Thebes]

It's not just white Americans who espouse this belief. You can find the same outlook on modernity/immigration/cultural change etc in Europe - this is well-known - but it's interesting to note that even 'non-white' cultures typically have xenopohobic elements that feel this way about foreign cultures.

There are issues with Japanese immigrants in Argentina, virtually any kind of immigrant culture in Japan but especially blacks and notably Brazilians as well, some Hindus in India loathe Muslims and vice-versa, China, South Korea, the Gulf States, all these countries have notable elements of xenophobia towards other cultures.

Nor is race necessarily the 'root cause' of the problem, albeit that the intellectual shortcuts formed in tenets of racist thought do facilitate the rapid and automatic dismissal of the worth of people of a different 'race' as far as racists are concerned, but concentrating on the American example, you find that quite a lot of the people who are hostile towards other nationalities are also hostile to cultural change occurring within white culture, especially the weakening of conventional gender norms and the spread of communitarian political ideas.

When they say "defend our culture" I feel they pretty clearly mean, "don't let any culture except mine thrive in the country that I live in."

[Pre-Christian Persecuted People]

Unpopular opinion, but I believe “white nationalism” is extreme subconscious response to reviving the religions of their ancestors, so called paganism against “other” religions which gave their ancestors genetic trauma with race being just a tool of politics. After all, every human irrespective of race is a racist with them subconsciously preferring someone who is same or similar as them rather than something different.

[Haganham]

Unpopular opinion, but I believe “white nationalism” is extreme subconscious response to reviving the religions of their ancestors, so called paganism against “other” religions which gave their ancestors genetic trauma with race being just a tool of politics. After all, every human irrespective of race is a racist with them subconsciously preferring someone who is same or similar as them rather than something different.

This theory is ahistorical. The primary, near exclusive persecutors of European paganism was Christianity.

[Rusozak]

I think we just got an idea of what they mean in Buffalo, NY.

[Pre-Christian Persecuted People]

Unpopular opinion, but I believe “white nationalism” is extreme subconscious response to reviving the religions of their ancestors, so called paganism against “other” religions which gave their ancestors genetic trauma with race being just a tool of politics. After all, every human irrespective of race is a racist with them subconsciously preferring someone who is same or similar as them rather than something different.

This theory is ahistorical. The primary, near exclusive persecutors of European paganism was Christianity.

And Christianity came from Middle East and was a part of Judaism, Christianity is foreign to Europe generally speaking. I understand theory might be an overstretch, but hey, psychologically, this can be looked into. I guess psychologically, there must have been trauma of the foreign religion which passed down genetically to the descendants whose ancestors were forced under the threat of death to become a Christian. Hence, anti semitism, fear of foreign religion spread across Europe, which is passed on to a few even today.

[The Alma Mater]

I think we just got an idea of what they mean in Buffalo, NY.

Yep But they will deny it.

[Saiwania]

Yep But they will deny it.

At risk of engaging in what-about-ism, the media doesn't push a narrative or agenda as much if at all, for non-white suspects who do incidents such as the black man that ran over a parade.

This attack will be forgotten in a year or less, people at Stormfront aren't impressed with him either.

[The Alma Mater]

Yep But they will deny it.

At risk of engaging in what-about-ism, the media doesn't push a narrative or agenda as much if at all, for non-white suspects who do incidents such as the black man that ran over a parade.

This attack will be forgotten in a year or less, people at Stormfront aren't impressed with him either.

Despite him using their logo?

[Australiem]

Bruh, we just don't want other cultures diluting our culture. It's like if a bunch of white people went over to Japan and changed their customs of spirituality and how stuff happens throughout their lives to something like our way of thinking and our culture. Consider what would happen if people went to a place with a rich culture and then simply changed it because they came from somewhere else.

That is what we want. We don't want blacks or Asians or anything else diluting our culture, our way of life. By claiming that we are wrong because we are racists or horrible people for celebrating what we did or believe in.

It's like saying that black African people who grew up in an area where they still do stuff that respects their culture shouldn't do that because it's seen as old ways or too tribal. 

[Ridinger fist]

migrants must be fully assimilated, without any exception. if they are so stupid, or have no respect for the place that gave food and shelter for them - they shouldn't exist physically.

[Ridinger fist]

it's not answer for main theme, it's answer for some stupid messages, which I have seen

[The Alma Mater]

Bruh, we just don't want other cultures diluting our culture. It's like if a bunch of white people went over to Japan and changed their customs of spirituality and how stuff happens throughout their lives to something like our way of thinking and our culture. Consider what would happen if people went to a place with a rich culture and then simply changed it because they came from somewhere else.

That is what we want. We don't want blacks or Asians or anything else diluting our culture, our way of life. By claiming that we are wrong because we are racists or horrible people for celebrating what we did or believe in.

It's like saying that black African people who grew up in an area where they still do stuff that respects their culture shouldn't do that because it's seen as old ways or too tribal. 

You repeated the phrase "our culture" numerous times.

What culture?

[Kanadorika]

This theory is ahistorical. The primary, near exclusive persecutors of European paganism was Christianity.

And Christianity came from Middle East and was a part of Judaism, Christianity is foreign to Europe generally speaking. I understand theory might be an overstretch, but hey, psychologically, this can be looked into. I guess psychologically, there must have been trauma of the foreign religion which passed down genetically to the descendants whose ancestors were forced under the threat of death to become a Christian. Hence, anti semitism, fear of foreign religion spread across Europe, which is passed on to a few even today.

Western and middle eastern civilization are intrinsically linked. Christianity originated in the Mediterranean region, which also gave birth to the great civilizations of Europe and the Near East. It's not as foreign as you seem to think it is.

[Kanadorika]

They want to defend the White American way of life these days. At least those in the U.S., of course.

The same way Asians want to defend Asian culture and Blacks want to defend Black culture.

For the most part, Asians defending Asian culture (whatever that is) and blacks defending black culture don't go on mass shooting rampages. It's mainly the white nationalists who do that. Hence why the later is dangerous while the former mostly isn't.

[Australiem]

You repeated the phrase "our culture" numerous times.

What culture?

Don't give me that. Every single nation or race has a culture and history that goes with it. As an Australian, I have the culture of Australia, the history we have been through, the travels we have done to make my nation, the fights we have been through, even the myths we have are culture. Yowie, for example, is the Australian version of the big foot. or the myth that there is a dog-like creature called the bunyip. 

Or the way we present ourselves to be apart from our culture, the way Australians greet everyone with G'day or mate, because most people who came to Australia would get drunk and eventually our lingo stemmed from that. 

There is so much to every culture and every nation that I think it is our duty to hold that up to other people. Every single nation should protect the rich culture and history of their ancestors. 

No race, or nation, should dilute another's. Everyone should keep to their culture and no one should interfere with it. If it dies out from their own stupidity, so be it. But I do not think culture should be actively diluted by immigrants or other races.

[Vassenor]

migrants must be fully assimilated, without any exception. if they are so stupid, or have no respect for the place that gave food and shelter for them - they shouldn't exist physically.

Define "fully assimilated".

[The Alma Mater]

You repeated the phrase "our culture" numerous times.

What culture?

Don't give me that. Every single nation or race has a culture and history that goes with it. As an Australian, I have the culture of Australia, the history we have been through, the travels we have done to make my nation, the fights we have been through, even the myths we have are culture. Yowie, for example, is the Australian version of the big foot. or the myth that there is a dog-like creature called the bunyip. 

Or the way we present ourselves to be apart from our culture, the way Australians greet everyone with G'day or mate, because most people who came to Australia would get drunk and eventually our lingo stemmed from that. 

There is so much to every culture and every nation that I think it is our duty to hold that up to other people. Every single nation should protect the rich culture and history of their ancestors. 

No race, or nation, should dilute another's. Everyone should keep to their culture and no one should interfere with it. If it dies out from their own stupidity, so be it. But I do not think culture should be actively diluted by immigrants or other races.

Again: a lot of words with no defintions. Cultures change nonstop. Things that were fundamental when you were young are now all but forgotten.
So what *exactly* do you mean ?

[Engadine Mcdonalds 1997]

You repeated the phrase "our culture" numerous times.

What culture?

Don't give me that. Every single nation or race has a culture and history that goes with it. As an Australian, I have the culture of Australia, the history we have been through, the travels we have done to make my nation, the fights we have been through, even the myths we have are culture. Yowie, for example, is the Australian version of the big foot. or the myth that there is a dog-like creature called the bunyip. 

Or the way we present ourselves to be apart from our culture, the way Australians greet everyone with G'day or mate, because most people who came to Australia would get drunk and eventually our lingo stemmed from that. 

There is so much to every culture and every nation that I think it is our duty to hold that up to other people. Every single nation should protect the rich culture and history of their ancestors. 

No race, or nation, should dilute another's. Everyone should keep to their culture and no one should interfere with it. If it dies out from their own stupidity, so be it. But I do not think culture should be actively diluted by immigrants or other races.

The only example of "Australian Culture" being legitimately unique and not a mutation of Britain's convicts being forcefully relocated here is your first one, that being of the Aboriginals, everything else is just as previously stated: a mutation of lower classed individuals being literally on the other side of the planet being among themselves. And 'pot-kettle' there with that last line of yours "No race, or nation, should dilute another's. Everyone should keep to their culture and no one should interfere with it. If it dies out from their own stupidity, so be it. But I do not think culture should be actively diluted by immigrants or other races", yeah, ask the Aboriginals who destroyed their way of life, culture, heritage and religion, because it's not the family from the Philippines that migrated here last decade

[Erythrean Thebes]

You repeated the phrase "our culture" numerous times.

What culture?

Don't give me that. Every single nation or race has a culture and history that goes with it. As an Australian, I have the culture of Australia, the history we have been through, the travels we have done to make my nation, the fights we have been through, even the myths we have are culture. Yowie, for example, is the Australian version of the big foot. or the myth that there is a dog-like creature called the bunyip. 

Or the way we present ourselves to be apart from our culture, the way Australians greet everyone with G'day or mate, because most people who came to Australia would get drunk and eventually our lingo stemmed from that. 

There is so much to every culture and every nation that I think it is our duty to hold that up to other people. Every single nation should protect the rich culture and history of their ancestors. 

No race, or nation, should dilute another's. Everyone should keep to their culture and no one should interfere with it. If it dies out from their own stupidity, so be it. But I do not think culture should be actively diluted by immigrants or other races.

To some extent, it's OK for you to advocate against changes to your culture. If you feel that something about your culture is changing, I feel it's very acceptable to speak out against it and advocate for the merits of your belief. My question would be, don't you think there have to be limits imposed that prohibit harming other people in order to prevent change?

This is one of the core issues - conservatives either feel that they can escalate the 'culture war' to the level of forceful or coercive tactics in order to fight back against cultural change, or they feel that the 'war' has already escalated to a level of threat and seriousness where they need to take militant action to stop it, but truly this is one of the absolute core disagreements between the two sides. Don't you feel that at a certain point, if you've made your case for your beliefs and expounded the reasons why you think a change shouldn't happen, if your fellow citizens still embrace the change anyway, isn't that something you have to accept as part of living in a free society that respects its citizens??

[American Legionaries]

Don't give me that. Every single nation or race has a culture and history that goes with it. As an Australian, I have the culture of Australia, the history we have been through, the travels we have done to make my nation, the fights we have been through, even the myths we have are culture. Yowie, for example, is the Australian version of the big foot. or the myth that there is a dog-like creature called the bunyip. 

Or the way we present ourselves to be apart from our culture, the way Australians greet everyone with G'day or mate, because most people who came to Australia would get drunk and eventually our lingo stemmed from that. 

There is so much to every culture and every nation that I think it is our duty to hold that up to other people. Every single nation should protect the rich culture and history of their ancestors. 

No race, or nation, should dilute another's. Everyone should keep to their culture and no one should interfere with it. If it dies out from their own stupidity, so be it. But I do not think culture should be actively diluted by immigrants or other races.

To some extent, it's OK for you to advocate against changes to your culture. If you feel that something about your culture is changing, I feel it's very acceptable to speak out against it and advocate for the merits of your belief. My question would be, don't you think there have to be limits imposed that prohibit harming other people in order to prevent change?

This is one of the core issues - conservatives either feel that they can escalate the 'culture war' to the level of forceful or coercive tactics in order to fight back against cultural change, or they feel that the 'war' has already escalated to a level of threat and seriousness where they need to take militant action to stop it, but truly this is one of the absolute core disagreements between the two sides. Don't you feel that at a certain point, if you've made your case for your beliefs and expounded the reasons why you think a change shouldn't happen, if your fellow citizens still embrace the change anyway, isn't that something you have to accept as part of living in a free society that respects its citizens??

There is a fundamental difference between fellow citizens embracing a cultural change, and fellow citizens forcing me and my peers to embrace a cultural change. The latter is very distinctly not what it means to live in a free society which respects it's citizens.

[Erythrean Thebes]

To some extent, it's OK for you to advocate against changes to your culture. If you feel that something about your culture is changing, I feel it's very acceptable to speak out against it and advocate for the merits of your belief. My question would be, don't you think there have to be limits imposed that prohibit harming other people in order to prevent change?

This is one of the core issues - conservatives either feel that they can escalate the 'culture war' to the level of forceful or coercive tactics in order to fight back against cultural change, or they feel that the 'war' has already escalated to a level of threat and seriousness where they need to take militant action to stop it, but truly this is one of the absolute core disagreements between the two sides. Don't you feel that at a certain point, if you've made your case for your beliefs and expounded the reasons why you think a change shouldn't happen, if your fellow citizens still embrace the change anyway, isn't that something you have to accept as part of living in a free society that respects its citizens??

There is a fundamental difference between fellow citizens embracing a cultural change, and fellow citizens forcing me and my peers to embrace a cultural change. The latter is very distinctly not what it means to live in a free society which respects it's citizens.

This gets right to one of the important questions that really should be presented to the American public more explicitly than it is right now - are we willing to allow different policies to exist in different areas of the country, which sort of represents each state and locality having a freedom of choice in how they govern themselves, or do we insist on a unified national policies on important issues like healthcare, education etc.

Either approach has its serious difficulties that need to be addressed, but that is exactly what we should be encouraging Americans to address, rather than hyping them up to destroy America's institutions and public safety in the name of legislative domination at any cost

[Adamede]

Unpopular opinion, but I believe “white nationalism” is extreme subconscious response to reviving the religions of their ancestors, so called paganism against “other” religions which gave their ancestors genetic trauma with race being just a tool of politics. After all, every human irrespective of race is a racist with them subconsciously preferring someone who is same or similar as them rather than something different.

"Genetic trauma" what the fuck is that supposed to be?

Sounds to me that you're just a racist.

[Adamede]

This theory is ahistorical. The primary, near exclusive persecutors of European paganism was Christianity.

And Christianity came from Middle East and was a part of Judaism, Christianity is foreign to Europe generally speaking. I understand theory might be an overstretch, but hey, psychologically, this can be looked into. I guess psychologically, there must have been trauma of the foreign religion which passed down genetically to the descendants whose ancestors were forced under the threat of death to become a Christian. Hence, anti semitism, fear of foreign religion spread across Europe, which is passed on to a few even today.

Sounds like a cool sci fi story idea. Not a way to look at the real world however.

[The Grand World Order]

There's a few different aspects to it, some related to each other, some not. People talking about defending their culture might agree to one, some, all, or none of these.

1: A while ago, companies in the United States realized it's easier to create one or a few astroturfed cultures to sell things to than it is to try and appeal to the many, many subcultures in the United States. This would be even more effective on an international scale.

2: Ray Sizzum, which is the answer you're obviously looking for.

3: The realization that there really isn't anywhere to go to preserve the cultures of many western nations that are increasingly allowing mass immigration. A German being culturally replaced in his homeland has nowhere to go (assuming Austria is also seeing mass immigration), but the culture of the Syrians/Libyans/etc mass immigrating to Germany will never be endangered, because their countries are never going to be pressured into accepting mass immigration.

4: A blend of 1 and 3: as there are more and more immigrant cultures in the mix, the incentive for the creation of a consumerist culture in place of trying to appeal to the many different cultures in a country becomes greater.

5: A kneejerk reaction to the sentiment that white people have no culture and that it's ok for other cultures to steamroll them in their ancestral homes- this sentiment's demonstrated in this very thread by the question "what culture?" or the notion that anyone seeking to advocate on behalf of not just white culture, but any white interests, is inherently Racist and Bad(TM). Compound this with the fact that mainstream ideology is cognizant of the negative effects of another culture moving in en masse, which they decry as gentrification and a tool of white supremacy.