All of their concerns? I'm sure you realize that people don't pick up an ideology like that unless it looks like their society isn't functioning.
White supremacy is an answer in search of a question, and the question need not (and ought not) be posed.
We shouldn't be ignoring the concerns of the radical Communists either; that doesn't mean we all should become Communists and repeat the atrocities of Stalin. Likewise, we don't need to become National Socialists in order to ease the pains that make them turn to the ideology.
We've been through these arguments since the 1940s. Karl Popper's view of the Paradox of Tolerance [1]
>Less well known is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.
If we want an open society that permits maximal freedom, we can not permit those who wish to destroy freedom to override those who wish for freedom. The white nationalist movement includes people who explicitly endorse fascism and "throwing into ovens" those who exercised their free speech. [2]
Stop defending this evil.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
[2] http://www.inforum.com/opinion/letters/4311880-letter-family...
>you can be accosted for publicly engaging a wrongthinker.
I don't think he cares about rationality, let alone having the fortitude to say what he means. "Everyone else is wrong and when I get called an asshole it's clearly because it's 1984."
It seems like you had this line in your clipboard, it is inaccurate, irrelevant, and puzzling in the context of this discussion.
> There are no communists involved in this discussion.
Well, there were communists at the rally, and they came with (thankfully blunt) weapons, ready to brawl. They dressed in black instead of red because that's the trend as of late. Radical communists have been regularly assaulting people at protests and assemblies in America for at least a year.
> We've been through these arguments since the 1940s. Karl Popper's view of the Paradox of Tolerance [1]
I'm not interested in tolerating political violence, but political speech I will.
We need to make ethnonationalism and other seductive ideologies obsolete, instead of suppressing the people who go to them for help.
You're implying a hidden knowledge of just what critical concerns people are ignoring, but you won't tell us.
Sorry if I was unclear. I meant to make the same statement as the first, in a different form. I hoped that providing two versions of the same statement, folks would have a better chance of understanding what I meant.
Once more: Nobody just chooses one day to become a white supremacist. Nobody is born a white supremacist. Nobody in their right mind would identify as a white supremacist without good reason, because doing so is mortally dangerous.
Clearly there's something wrong in their life for them to accept an ideological solution as severe and impractical as white supremacy. That is, they have a serious question, which the answer of white supremacy has found.
> You're implying a hidden knowledge of just what critical concerns people are ignoring, but you won't tell us.
I suspect their concerns are pedestrian: unsatisfactory employment (or lack thereof), the cost of health care, security, the uncertainty of demographic shifts (especially the shrinking proportion of their own race, and the growing relevance of race in public discourse), the moral conditions for their children (though largely an unfounded concern, given how safe America is).
Yes.
>We shouldn't be ignoring the concerns of the radical Communists either;
Not even remotely the same thing. Not even in the same galaxy. Not even in the same universe.
What do you mean? They're both totalitarian ideologies and have much in common.
I'm sure white supremacists are concerned about employment, the decline of the American manufacturing sector, and the cost of health insurance. In fact, I'm pretty sure these concerns contribute to their desire to join others who say they have the solution.
> Not even remotely the same thing. Not even in the same galaxy. Not even in the same universe.
Now, I'm not generally one to nickel-and-dime the deathtolls of genocidal ideologies, but I don't think you could credibly argue that in the 20th century National Socialism was more deadly than Communism. At least you'd have to concede that they are in "the same universe", or "the same galaxy".
Don't use hyperbole, else all of your blood will drain instantly from your eyes.
