Trump names white nationalist to top White House position

Post Reply New Topic

and few other people seem to get it.

Those too dumb to understand history are doomed to repeat it.

There's not going to be a holocaust.

Probably not. But there could be families ripped apart, as people who have been born American citizens see their parents sent away. Or clear discrimination might be the name of the game regarding which religion and ethnicity we allow into our country - thereby condemning millions of innocent people to death because they have no where to escape to. Included in how Americans are already being physically bullied and attacked for their religion or skin color. No, there probably won't be another Holocaust, but that doesn't mean what people of the wrong color, national origin, or religion will have it easy. No Americans should have to go through that sh*t.

You're either in the country legally or illegally. Period.
And lately we've been having some Trump supporters bullied and attacked by sore butthurt losers.

PS: I thought for sure I'd be under another boycott after my last reply to you in that other thread.

There have been far more bad winners who have been attacking liberals, blacks, Latinos, gays, and others.
And I'll remind you, I responded to your last post politely. Otherwise, you have no reason to talk to me or Blabby if all you have to offer are insults.

When criticizing others for being racist it behooves one not to use language that stereotypes a group of people in this case inbred cracker which are negative stereotypes of rural Southern Americans.

A quick search will reveal Kraichgauer has made several posts before referring to "inbred crackers", despite the, er, "irony" of this being pointed out to him.

It just goes to show that people like him have no principles - they just have narratives.

Christ, you really are naive, but that’s par for the course on this forum. Can you not think of any other interest groups in society beyond “liberals” and “conservatives”? Can you not even imagine that some people have other group loyalties they care more about than the “liberal” or “conservative” labels that mean so much to people like you?

It’s pretty annoying knowing that if I spelled it out for you I’d just get my post removed.

I assume though that if I won’t be permitted to spell it out to you I’ll at least be allowed to point out that90% of the American media is owned by 6 corporations.

But keep droning on about “conspiracy theories” if it makes you feel smart.



No, white nationalists are just a subset of the alt-right. The alt-right is a loose conglomeration also containing paleoconservatives, Asian-worshipping IQ-fetishists, anti-feminists and conviction-free anti-SJW and anti-PC trolls.

Many people who are becoming disillusioned with the mainstream right (having already rejected the mainstream left) are gravitating towards the alt-right (hence the name “alt-right”), and the groups within the alt-right are competing with each other to define what exactly the alt-right is (as opposed to merely saying what it is not).

In short, someone like Bannon declaring himself or his website to be alt-right does not make him a White Nationalist.



I know this is an aspie forum, but you don’t need to explain the concept of a metaphor for me, unless you’re that desperate to make yourself look smart. I asked you what your statement meant, and you didn’t answer the question. Does it mean he supports White Nationalism? Or rather that some of the people he employs do? Or rather that some of the anonymous commenters on his website do? Do you even know?



It’s a news and opinion website with a comments section. If you object to the word ‘forum’ take it up with Ian Tuttle, who wrote that National Review article you linked to.



Like what? Stories about non-white crimes that the mainstream media have ignored? Unflattering generalizations about non-whites? Yeah, I know. That doesn’t make them White Nationalists. Do you even understand this? White Nationalism is about creating homogenous White homelands. Has Breitbart’s website come out in support of this? No it hasn’t. Now that Bannon is about to become one of the most powerful people in America, has he come out in open support of White Nationalism himself? No, he hasn’t.

But I suppose these distinctions are difficult for the sort of people who have a hissy fit when they hear a conservative talking about “Western culture” or “Muslim terrorists” or “Mexican criminals” and so on.



Seems like it’s hard for you.

I wonder if this is his way of keeping his eye on enemies. The titles are impressive but what exactly is the job description? Looks like, in the past, it was defined by the President from time to time. So there's no power that goes with the fancy title. If you want to disable somebody, appoint him right next to you and micromanage (even by 3rd party).

At this point, Trump and his ilk can walk down the street with the heads of immigrants, blacks and gay people on sticks and his constituents would say those minorities made that happen to themselves.

Trump can convince me he'll do the right thing in America by hiring minorities to important posts in his cabinet. And by minorities, I don't mean left-handed white men or white men who graduated from state colleges as opposed to Harvard, Yale and so on.

I REFUSE to believe there are unqualified minorities for important cabinet positions in Trump's administration.

Didn't say there weren't just that the liberals, the ones that love to preach about diversity and tolerance, havent been playing nice since thier loss last week.


No, you didnt reply to my last because I just looked.

He's been hounded for years about his narrative but to no avail.

If you watch the political landscape for a while, you quickly discover that the most sexist people are the loud anti-sexists, and the most racist people are the loud anti-racists.

...and here I thought that it couldn't possibly get any worse than karl rove....

I get the feeling that if your idea would remove itself, it's probably absurd/terrible.

There is no doubt that there are other group loyalties in existence, but partisanship is a major loyalty in the US. Past that, I wouldn't take something like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion as a good source.


LOL. We're currently talking about the National Review, which is privately held. Regardless, your statement that some companies hold other companies still doesn't justify anything.


I don't think that in practice, this is going to make a big difference for any complaints about Bannon. Given that what currently is in the space of being "alt-right", also includes things that do literally and overtly transgress the traditional lines of what is acceptable behavior.

If you're trying to walk this back from "white nationalist" to "nationalist who just happens to be racist/willing to promote racism", I don't have a strong objection, but I'm not that concerned with splitting hairs on something terrible.
http://qz.com/841036/is-steve-bannon-a-white-supremacist-trumps-advisor-wants-to-rebrand-racism-as-american-nationalism/


It means that he has strong affiliations with the concept.


Ian Tuttle's use of the word and your implication by comparing it to 4chan really is a bit of mischaracterization, because of the whole "news source and opinion website" thing.


*shrug* I really didn't see them as important for the purposes of this thread. I mean, this isn't an amazing defense, as it still doesn't suggest that he should be in the white house or near the levers of power.

As for the last bit, a lot of the time, conservatives use these as dog whistles, but otherwise, they're perfectly acceptable things to talk about. And I hope this doesn't come off as condescending, but... conservative use of these as dog whistles really does undermine the possibility of fruitful conversation. This isn't to say that SJWs aren't toxic either, as they are, but I think they have less power on the left than dogmatism has on the right.(basically, uneven polarization has occurred between the sides)