What's the difference between "alt-right" and white supremacy?
What's the difference between "alt-right" and white supremacy?
Nolan Bell
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtu.be
youtu.be
youtu.be
youtu.be
youtu.be
en.m.wikipedia.org
youtube.com
nypost.com
foxnews.com
foxnews.com
twitter.com
Joseph Fisher
idk
Thomas Carter
Alt-right wants whites to keep the countries they are already a majority in and not be demographically replaced in Europe. Nothing supremacist about it.
Xavier Reed
>Whites build every society and all the infrastructure in africa
>Jews control banks and push for demographic replacement of lesser
Totes the same
Joseph Bell
Why do liberals claim that "white supremacy" exists?
Isn't it proving the stormfag point that whites are superior by acknowledging it?
Isaac Watson
Alt-right is a reaction to radical leftists and modern conservatives ineptness to fight it
Dominic Perez
Because advocating for your own demographic when you are white, esspecially a white male means you are supremacist
Matthew Moore
(((White supremacy)))
Ayden Ortiz
Nah its just a type of political organization like liberalism, communism, fascism and so on. In my opinion white supremacy ranks amongst the best political ideologies if you think about it like that to be honest lad. At least its better than communism, fascism and all the other fringe ones.
Juan Sullivan
White supremacists, by definition, desire to rule over other races. Supremacy, in a political context means nothing else. No one here that I've seen remotely wants that.
Bentley Brown
"Supremacy" is a meme-word.
If you're part of a group, you want to advance the interests of that group. "Supremacy" is just a group being much better than the others, and (((other people))) whining about it.
Ask (((them))) if they're willing to abandon Israelite supremacy and hand out the presidency to an Arab Muslim.
Christopher Perry
>In my opinion white supremacy ranks amongst the best political ideologies if you think about it like that to be honest lad
I'd prefer that other ethnics rule over themselves in their own jurisdictions.
Cooper Gray
>What's the difference between "alt-right" and white supremacy?
The alt right puts their Jew hate on suspension momentarily because a dicklet like trump said he was gonna deport illegal Mexicans
Useful idiots think Mexicans are a greater threat to them so they are ensnared by trump's flip flopping stances
In short, there is basically no distinction between both groups
Joseph Lopez
>"Supremacy" is just a group being much better than the others, and (((other people))) whining about it.
US Supreme Court doesn't mean that the judges think they're better than others. It means that they rule over other courts
US Supreme Allied Commander didn't mean that General Eisenhower thought he was a better general than General Montgomery. It meant that he was the ultimate command and every other soldier had to follow his orders
"Air supremacy" doesn't mean better planes. You're thinking of "air superiority".
"Supremacy" in political context ALWAYS means ruling over.
Ian Ward
>posting this while the default trumpfag stance is to ban drugs
Lmao
Ian Peterson
Read the culture of critique.
Xavier James
one is a lousy conspiracy theory
one is a group of attention-whores hamming it up for upvotes
Aaron Wright
HA HA
HAH HAH AH AAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHA
ENOUGH
Easton Sanchez
"White supremacist" is only not a misnomer as used to apply to antibellum US Southerners who held that they had a divine right to rule over blacks. Anyone who merely desires freedom of association or for European peoples to have their own homelands is by definition NOT a white supremacist. You can't rule over peoples who are not in your jurisdiction.
Logan Foster
>whites are superior by acknowledging it?
Being superior is irrelevant to supremacy. Political supremacy requires that the supreme entity have authority or rule over another entity or entities. There haven't been more than a handful of "white supremacists" in the US since the 1970s.
Jose King
I see ahere you're coming from. But from the political aspect, the way I see it, a "white supremacist" society means explicitly pro-white. Whites being at the top of the hierarchy, and what is at the bottom doesn't matter.
In a modern sense, "white-supremacist" societies would be by whites, for whites only. Non-whites would be lower in society, or not physically in the society at all. And that's the importance of homogeneous countries, you can have governments that act explicitly for the sake of their main population, without needing to suppress others.
"White supremacy" is a concept mostly restricted to the US, due to their hisyorically multi-racial society. In Europe, national identity is much stronger than race, so you would advance your own country.
If you asked, say an Italian, if he wanted Italy to be the greatest country in the world. Most advanced, richest, safest, most influential, you name it. He would be mad to say no. Because you're supposed to want to see the people around you suceed and prosper.
That's so lost today, that even an "America First" policy is considered negative. But that's what you need to expect from a government, that they will protect and advance its people. Supremacy would be a consequence of success. After the Soviets fell, it could be argued the US achieved supremacy, due to having no challenger to their power in the world.
Who would give that up just because, and intentionally make their own country weaker? Sure, America has great power over all other nations of the world, and that's due to their technological, economical, military capacity, and more. What's wrong with that, just because it's unfair?
And it's the same concept for a "white race". If you consider yourself white, you want whites to suceed. The problem people had was with having a white racial identity, not just advancing it.
Nowadays it's even worse, they want everyone to curl up, and accept having everything taken from them.
Austin Fisher
...
Lincoln Rogers
It's a misnomer used as a smear and a dysphemism. It's meant to evoke unpleasant visual and gustatory reactions. And it's easy to show that it doesn't apply to anyone. Separatist or freedom of association and freedom of contract advocate are some orthophemistic terms to use instead.
Civil rights: the right to access to white European peoples.
Tyler Parker
You just described white nationalism
Juan Peterson
>Useful idiots think Mexicans are a greater threat to them
A large, fast breeding, welfare using, voting bloc?
Yes.
Evan Ortiz
Illegals can't vote
Mexico's birthrates are consistently situated at 2.2 births per woman
Illegals shouldn't get welfare
10 million illegals isn't a large quantity in a 330 million population
Gee that was hard
Ryder Moore
>You just described white nationalism
Trump said he didn't want votes from "white suprmacists". That won't hurt him a bit. Only about 10 or 12 fewer votes.
Adrian Watson
The alt-right is composed of a vast array of different groups, some of which are white supremacists, although they're in the minority. White nationalists however, aren't.
There's monarchists, traditionalists, natsocs, racialists, etc. etc. Lots of different ideologies, many of which have nothing at all to do with race.
What unites the "alt-right" (and there really isn't much) is an honest wish to return to better times, to base society on sensible principles and ideals instead of pure greed and to actually be able to discuss things instead of being shouted down.
Lincoln Green
>alt right is supposedly anti-greed
>wants to vote in a faggot and his family who profited off for decades from the practices that allegedly killed america
That's like voting for pablo escobar so he ends illegal drug trafficking, dumbass
Xavier Price
>the difference between "alt-right" and white supremacy
Alt-right is pro-gay and pro-race mixing, white nationalism isn't.
>youtube.com
"White supremacy" is a kike pejorative term meant to stigmatize white ethnic interests and consciousness; every racial group is supremacist, especially Jews. Jews above all others:
>The Talmudic basis of Jewish supremacy
youtu.be
>Noel Ignatiev
youtu.be
>Miscegenation illegal in Israel
youtu.be
>Jews push immigration to white nations
youtu.be
>Jewish Supremacism
youtu.be
Jason Miller
God, you're so right, homes. Gilberto Orejuela is a much better choice.
Jonathan Garcia
>idiots think Mexicans are a greater threat to them
Are you seriously talking shit about people who think 90 million illegal colonists having anchor babies, taking $54 billion per year in welfare, and voting for the complete loss of sovereignty and the US Constitution, represents a threat -- with a Mexican flag?
That has to be bait right?
You wouldn't seriously do that, because you're not that much of a fucking idiot, right?
Lucas Williams
See
>gotta sit down and watch as you get cucked by the bipartisan system again, but at least I got pretty promises!
Austin Sanders
>Illegals can't vote
Of course they can because Democrats fight ID laws, and in California are pushing to make it legal for them to vote, you fucking nonce.
>Mexico's birthrates
How is that relevant to whether anchor babies and the drain on the US system represents and existential threat to their demographics?
>Illegals shouldn't get welfare
They do, $54 billion per year, $9 trillion over the course of a lifetime.
>10 million illegal
At least 30, with an estimated high of 90 -- I already linked you to sources here you ignored them like a good little shill.
James Ward
Alt-right is any right winger who dislikes the GOP's version of the right wing. So, the majority of right wingers are "alt-right".
It means fucking nothing and it's like saying a Maoist and a Hippie Commune are both the same thing and part of the "alt-left".
Liam Diaz
this, but also, its a term being forced mainly by website owners and youtube ecelebs who want to corss-market each other. It's an extension of the gamergate media phenomenon, where talking youtube shills try to build a fanbase around a pseudo-movement. Alt-right represents no new ideas or ideology.
William Martin
That must be why your consulates are rushing documentation through, right?
Brody Bell
Ask the Tibetans, are they supremacists too?
Christopher Miller
alt-right does not exist, who's the leader? the faggot who sucks nigger cock, said who?
Jaxson Butler
Leftist ethics only apply to non-whites, whites aren't considered humans in their eyes. Whites owe it to the world to be bread out, because there's something evil and murderous in their genes. Leftists will tell you this frankly in conversations, that non-whites are just more human. Pure ethno-masochism and oikophobia.
David Robinson
>Of course they can because Democrats fight ID laws, and in California are pushing to make it legal for them to vote, you fucking nonce.
Liar liar pants on fire
It's just not legal for them to vote, in either case it doesn't matter, I thought all you knuckle drafters truly believed the 'leftists don't vote' meme?
>How is that relevant to whether anchor babies and the drain on the US system represents and existential threat to their demographics?
Because mexicans aren't reproducing like racists would have you believe.
>They do, $54 billion per year, $9 trillion over the course of a lifetime.
Non citizens should not get welfare. This is basic logic.
Cutting down welfare gets the same job done as building a wall or deporting people.
>At least 30, with an estimated high of 90 -- I already linked you to sources here
Yeah, because counting legal Mexicans as illegals is intellectually honest, nice one.
> you ignored them like a good little shill.
Lmao what makes you think I'm 'shilling'? Having a different opinion?
Evan Garcia
Also
>implying i'm gonna type out sources from a shitty screencap on my phone because some faggot can't be arsed to make information accesible
Lincoln Bailey
>Illegals can't vote
Their children can, via 14th Amendment birthright citizenship, and considering that Hispanics are the demographic with the highest fertility rate, this is an issue.
This is a compounded by the fact that
>illegal
is a risk of being eroded. Most Democrats and a sufficient portion of Republicans support amnesty, or a path for making those
>illegals
legal.
>Illegals shouldn't get welfare
Shouldn't and don't are two separate things.
Also you miss the point that the children and grandchildren of said illegals follow the general hispanic rate of usage public services and public monies.
>10 million illegals isn't a large quantity in a 330 million population
It's 11.4 million people actually, and yes, 1 in 30 million people is a huge deal demographically, much less the their children.
Charles Rodriguez
>phone excuse
>after typing all that fucking bullshit and cut/pasted links.
>lying on fucking Sup Forums
Leave.
Jaxon Rogers
>the default trumpfag stance is to ban drugs
source?
Samuel White
One is used by faggots to label opposition the other is used by faggots to shut down arguments. Neither are effective
Chase Harris
>Because mexicans aren't reproducing like racists would have you believe.
see:
> The 2013 U.S. fertility rate among Hispanics stands at 73 births per thousand women aged 15-44,
> The U.S. fertility rate among Black non-Hispanics was 65 in 2013
> U.S. White non-Hispanic fertility rate ... 59 in 2013.
>Non citizens should not get welfare. This is basic logic.
It is easier politically and logistically to remove people that should not be here, and lot let people who should not be here in, than it is to dismantle a welfare system already in existence.
Furthermore this doesn't say much for those children of non-citizens who are citizens by default and get welfare.
>Cutting down welfare gets the same job done as building a wall or deporting people.
No. If you get rid of the welfare state before reforming immigration, it will be voted back in in 18 years when the citizen children of illegals get to vote.
If we keep the US White and Asian, there would be no need to reform the welfare system.
Charles Bailey
We're talking about reading through several walls of text, typing out 9 URLs all with long paths and case sensitive data, AND reading through each individual page to verify a specific claim. I don't think it's unreasonable to think someone did a good job in making information poorly accessible either purposefully or not on purpose.
>bawww why aren't they reading muh poorly constructed chan redpills :'(
Kys
Hudson Miller
We're neutral on drugs.
We mainly want to audit the FTAs, reduce immigration, deport illegals, and stop the proxy wars against Russia, while retaining gun rights.
Trump is strong/weak against drugs?
Secondary.
Trump is strong/weak on socialized medicine?
Secondary.
Alexander Hughes
>Supremacy in military contexts means "ruling over"
>Therefore supremacy in politics means the same thing
Shitter argument t b h
Jonathan Hill
>kikes are intelligent
>alt-right is a thing
Eli Davis
>What's the difference between "alt-right" and white supremacy?
The "alt-right" doesn't exist, nigger.
Gavin Carter
>white supremacy
Since whites are a minority, how could there be supremacy?
Checkmate, atheists.
Adrian Hill
Because it's not true, we are still the 65% of the population.
Sebastian Ward
>alt right is supposedly anti-greed
This is an oversimplificaiton, but generally speaking they want an audit of 'free trade', and to stop outsourcing and insourcing
>wants to vote in a faggot and his family who profited off for decades from the practices that allegedly killed america
Construction, at times using foreign workers?
In any case this is not an argument, since Trump appealed to an easily organizable homogeneous group that will storm DC if none of his populist campaign promises are in motion during his first term
Joseph Ortiz
>Wikipedia
Straight to the trash, innit.
Pay attention, Pablo.
>youtube.com
>Our data comes from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES). Its large number of observations (32,800 in 2008 and 55,400 in 2010) provide sufficient samples of the non-immigrant sub-population, with 339 non-citizen respondents in 2008 and 489 in 2010. For the 2008 CCES, we also attempted to match respondents to voter files so that we could verify whether they actually voted.
>How many non-citizens participate in U.S. elections? More than 14 percent of non-citizens in both the 2008 and 2010 samples indicated that they were registered to vote. Furthermore, some of these non-citizens voted. Our best guess, based upon extrapolations from the portion of the sample with a verified vote, is that 6.4 percent of non-citizens voted in 2008 and 2.2 percent of non-citizens voted in 2010.
>Because non-citizens tended to favor Democrats (Obama won more than 80 percent of the votes of non-citizens in the 2008 CCES sample), we find that this participation was large enough to plausibly account for Democratic victories in a few close elections. Non-citizen votes could have given Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health-care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress.
Source:
>www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2014/10/24/could-non-citizens-decide-the-november-election/
See also:
nypost.com
>foxnews.com
>www.nationalreview.com/article/431676/obama-administration-enabling-noncitizen-voting
foxnews.com
Noah Evans
The alt-right doesn't exist.
People who are afraid (dems and establishment cuckservatives) are trying to figure out a way to name us, to name Sup Forums, to keep everything and everyone down and go about business as usual.
Racism is a keyword for putting people down, but its not working anymore. You can even see why by looking at the democrats and noticing just how racist they really are, which now balances the equilibrium of the racist keyword. It is no longer affecting people the way it used to, so they have to come up with a term to use for their new enemy to further discredit it because they are afraid of what it is capable of.
But yes, please continue asking silly questions about the "alt-right" and "white supremacy" and implying that we are "racists" in order to give buzzwords more meaning than they should have.
Adam Gray
Wait, wait, wait, what?
Someone can be a civil nationalist and alt-right?
Isaiah Russell
Of course. It's a nebulous label.
For those not too big into GTKRWN or racial separatism, there is a section that wants strong borders, a strong military not involved in corporate plots, and highly audited trade.
But it's a name a lot of us took for ourselves.
Landon Rodriguez
The "alt" right are a pack of filthy degenerates, and therefore can neither call themselves White nor supreme. The "alt" right are just the millennial cancer that is trying its best imitation of the boomer cancer so history can repeat forever in this hellish circle until mankind is extinct.