Is white nationalism necessarily bad?

[Roel]

The standard challenge this attitude is that many people think that trying to understand why people are as they are is the same as trying to excuse ideas or behaviours that are generally regarded as "bad".

Exactly. This is also the reason why for example pedophiles or jihadists more often act out on their feelings then seeking help, because people don't want to help them as it would, some claim, justify their actions if you try to understand them.

I think it can rather provide a solution.

What makes this topic related to these days, is that many Trump voters fit this category of white nationalism. We can try to understand them here.

[Alias]

Thought experiment:
Abduct 2000 random pedestrians from downtown Chicago. Drop (gently!!) half in Nairobi, half in Vienna.
Guess what numbers from each group, and along what lines, will acclimatize faster, assimilate more completely, gravitate to the main surrounding culture or cleave to their multi-coloured compatriots. That should give a pretty fair indication of skin-related a culture is.

[Fooloso4]

Dolphin42:

In my experience people are rarely irrational.

In my experience people, including myself, are not nearly as rational we or they assume. There have been some recent studies, books, articles on this, but nothing in particular that I can point to at the moment, although Google yields a lot of results.

[Richard]

I think that some people may be confusing natural instincts with prejudice.
Monkeys of a species stay together.
Denying this is going against that which is natural.
Its not racist.
I admire Aboriginal culture.
It is wrong to think we all should be the same.
What a boring world it would be. How ignorant are we to believe that we are the standard that everyone wants to be.

[Ormond]

White nationalists are about as rational as "Blue Eyed Nationalists" or "Curly Haired Nationalists" would be.

[Sy Borg]

Dolphin42:

In my experience people are rarely irrational.

In my experience people, including myself, are not nearly as rational we or they assume. There have been some recent studies, books, articles on this, but nothing in particular that I can point to at the moment, although Google yields a lot of results.

Definitely. Most of the time we are simply driven by animal impulses, using complex strategies for achieving those simple ends.

As Richard noted above, species tend to aggregate with their peers and reject outsiders. You don't see other birds admitted into a penguin huddle, nor other cats allowed into a lion's pride. Each ant in a line will check passing ants, and any that so not smell of the next will be immediately attacked. Chimps do not allow outsiders into their tribes, aside from females treated as chattel after major conflicts. Tribal people did the same. The impulse to isolate and separate is primal, basic. So it's not "bad", and is very understandable, an extension of our usual impulse not to allow others into our homes.

Bottom line: nature is full of beings who want your stuff so everyone is evolved to protect their resources (and self). So all of us descendants of past survivors have inherited the the urge to band together with peers and protect your collective stuff from outsiders, be they humans or other species. Just as we routinely resolve conflict via discussion rather than violence we can also override our base instincts in this issue. Generally speaking, the more dire the situation, the more we rely on instinct rather than reason, seeing reasoned overriding of instinct as a "luxury" that can no longer be afforded.

[Alias]

I missed the part of evolution where Europeans and Asians became different species.
Also the part of the instinct for self-preservation where one third of a nation turning against another third of the same nation leads to a higher survival rate than finding common cause with upright bipeds who wear clothes, practice agriculture and share a written languages.

-- Updated November 16th, 2016, 6:21 pm to add the following --

If two chimpanzees from one tribe and three chimpanzees from another tribe and two chimpanzees from a third tribe and three chimpanzees from a fourth tribe were to wash up on a desert island, would they all kill one another, go off in separate tribe-fragments, or band together?
What about after they heard a jaguar roar?

[Roel]

I missed the part of evolution where Europeans and Asians became different species.
Also the part of the instinct for self-preservation where one third of a nation turning against another third of the same nation leads to a higher survival rate than finding common cause with upright bipeds who wear clothes, practice agriculture and share a written languages.

-- Updated November 16th, 2016, 6:21 pm to add the following --

If two chimpanzees from one tribe and three chimpanzees from another tribe and two chimpanzees from a third tribe and three chimpanzees from a fourth tribe were to wash up on a desert island, would they all kill one another, go off in separate tribe-fragments, or band together?
What about after they heard a jaguar roar?

Depends on their upbringing and if they ever had any negative experiences with the other chimpanzees before. If not, they might band together.

[Fooloso4]

Roel:

What makes this topic related to these days, is that many Trump voters fit this category of white nationalism. We can try to understand them here.

Seeking understanding is a good thing, but understanding and approval are two different things. I am sure that within the category white nationalism we will find some differences in views, and so, we should not be too quick to attribute any particular belief to any individual. In your original post you said:

What unites them is a dislike of black people and children of parents of mixed race.

So, let’s go with that. We all have our likes and dislikes but this is not a just reason for racial segregation. It is simply wrong for someone to force his neighbor to live somewhere else because he does not like the color of his skin. We can try to understand why he does not blacks but what practical difference does that make if he still attempts to drive blacks out of his community or wants to establish a separate nation within an existing nation?

As I pointed out it an earlier post, we are about to find out how bad it will be be. Trump is going to appoint Steve Bannon to a high level advisory position. If you do not know who he is here is a good place to start. It will only take a few minutes to read:

nytimes.com/2016/11/15/opinion/turn-on- ... house.html

Already we are seeing a strong increase in reports of racial hate crime, threats, and intimidation, and a significant amount is being done by young children.

Richard:

I think that some people may be confusing natural instincts with prejudice.

Many white Americans are adopting black and Chinese babies. The babies do not display a natural instinct against their parents because they are of a different race. They love who loves them.

There are many interracial children today who may have difficulty with their identity but only when they are confronted by people who think it important to identify them by race.

Children brought up without racial prejudice do not display a natural instinct that draws them to others of their race and away from others of a different race.

Monkeys of a species stay together.

White is not a species.

It is wrong to think we all should be the same.

I do not think anyone has said we should all be the same, but rather that the fact that we may be different races is not a legitimate reason to form separate nations.

[Roel]

Roel:

What makes this topic related to these days, is that many Trump voters fit this category of white nationalism. We can try to understand them here.

Seeking understanding is a good thing, but understanding and approval are two different things. I am sure that within the category white nationalism we will find some differences in views, and so, we should not be too quick to attribute any particular belief to any individual. In your original post you said:

What unites them is a dislike of black people and children of parents of mixed race.

So, let’s go with that. We all have our likes and dislikes but this is not a just reason for racial segregation. It is simply wrong for someone to force his neighbor to live somewhere else because he does not like the color of his skin. We can try to understand why he does not blacks but what practical difference does that make if he still attempts to drive blacks out of his community or wants to establish a separate nation within an existing nation?

As I pointed out it an earlier post, we are about to find out how bad it will be be. Trump is going to appoint Steve Bannon to a high level advisory position. If you do not know who he is here is a good place to start. It will only take a few minutes to read:

nytimes.com/2016/11/15/opinion/turn-on- ... house.html

Already we are seeing a strong increase in reports of racial hate crime, threats, and intimidation, and a significant amount is being done by young children.

Richard:

I think that some people may be confusing natural instincts with prejudice.

Many white Americans are adopting black and Chinese babies. The babies do not display a natural instinct against their parents because they are of a different race. They love who loves them.

There are many interracial children today who may have difficulty with their identity but only when they are confronted by people who think it important to identify them by race.

Children brought up without racial prejudice do not display a natural instinct that draws them to others of their race and away from others of a different race.

Monkeys of a species stay together.

White is not a species.

It is wrong to think we all should be the same.

I do not think anyone has said we should all be the same, but rather that the fact that we may be different races is not a legitimate reason to form separate nations.

I don't show approval for any hateful form of nationalism, including white nationalism.

I indeed said this in the OP based on my quick browsing on this forum of these peculiar people. I saw the tendency that this was their opinion in general, some even liked zionists which surprised me.

Driving blacks out is of course wrong, just like driving out Arabs from houses where they live in Gaza is wrong, but if they want to live as a seperate nation in a truly empty piece of land, like Israelis, if they stay confined to that land, is there any reasonable argument against that? I think it might solve problems. Instead of attacking innocent black men these people can move and stay in a seperate piece of land, while tolerant white people stay where they are. If they don't bother anyone with it, why not give them some empty land to get rid of the problems they cause if they never want to be tolerant anyway?

[Richard]

It is nice to see that there are still some People who believe that being different is alright.
In Australia we are considered to be a multicultural society.
Our Government has adopted a turn back the boats policy.
I don't believe they would have done that if the Refugees where White.
I dont agree with the policy although I can see a growing number of problems throughout the World since different races have been forced together.
I can also see that any color nationalism is fine.

[LuckyR]

I think that some people may be confusing natural instincts with prejudice.
Monkeys of a species stay together.
Denying this is going against that which is natural.
Its not racist.
I admire Aboriginal culture.
It is wrong to think we all should be the same.
What a boring world it would be. How ignorant are we to believe that we are the standard that everyone wants to be.

Your comments are accurate as written, though the huge unspoken part is that in Real Life, when groups concentrate on the us aspect, they can start to become overly negative towards the them in the equation. Not a rule, of course but an extremely common occurrence.

[Roel]

It is nice to see that there are still some People who believe that being different is alright.
In Australia we are considered to be a multicultural society.
Our Government has adopted a turn back the boats policy.
I don't believe they would have done that if the Refugees where White.
I dont agree with the policy although I can see a growing number of problems throughout the World since different races have been forced together.
I can also see that any color nationalism is fine.

I think that Japanese society might back up that a homogenous society works better. Japan has a very low crime-rate and not many other colored people like whites and blacks live there. Maybe if the non-ethnical people are there in a small number it can work, and in a bigger number, problems arise and you get a clash of cultures.

Look at the Hutus and Tutus, put two big different groups together, and you get trouble.

Wanting a homogenous society is something different than attacking peopld which don't look like you and expell them.

In the Netherlands we even have a political party by Turks which denies the Armenian genocide and wants to replace integration with "mutual acceptence", accepting an orthodox islam to prevail, great idea, orthodox islam is incompatible with acceptance, because it is inherently intolerant.

-- Updated November 16th, 2016, 8:25 pm to add the following --

I think that some people may be confusing natural instincts with prejudice.
Monkeys of a species stay together.
Denying this is going against that which is natural.
Its not racist.
I admire Aboriginal culture.
It is wrong to think we all should be the same.
What a boring world it would be. How ignorant are we to believe that we are the standard that everyone wants to be.

Your comments are accurate as written, though the huge unspoken part is that in Real Life, when groups concentrate on the us aspect, they can start to become overly negative towards the them in the equation. Not a rule, of course but an extremely common occurrence.

So you should find out why that is. Usually the cause is surpression of your own ethnic group.

[Sy Borg]

Comments pertaining to the fact that humans are the same species spectacularly manage to miss the point. Whatever the divisions - species, colour, creed, nationality, subculture - it's the same principle. Us and them. Our stuff and their stuff.

This is a natural impulse. As humans we can go with our impulses or override them with reason. Note that, the more dire the circumstance, the more likely it is that people will follow impulses rather than reason.

[Roel]

Comments pertaining to the fact that humans are the same species spectacularly manage to miss the obvious point. Whatever the divisions - species, colour, creed, nationality, subculture - it's the same principle. Us and them. Our stuff and their stuff.

This is a natural impulse. As humans we can go with our impulses or override them with reason. Note that, the more dire the circumstance, the more likely it is that people will follow impulses rather than reason.

They aren't always overrided with reason. Look at jewish people. Aren't they by reason, staying together as a group? Even when they aren't in a dire circumstance?