Talk:White nationalism/Archive 5

1130:"Ever since the Confederate States of America's loss in the Civil War, the people who had lived in those states at the time—no matter what race they were—had to start the fight for jobs, power, and other more unimportant things against each other within their own states. At this point in the 18th century United States, the white population had felt an incessant need to be superior to, and more successful than, blacks—both from social and economic standpoints. Before the war, whites were easily above blacks; however, now slavery was abolished. Although this did not mean that blacks were now equal to whites by any means, it was just the beginning of the many steps to achieving minority equality. For now, blacks were at least not considered property of the white man throughout the southern states. This, consequently, instilled fear in the white population—would their race not reign supreme forever? Whenever a group is afraid of losing its identity and power, especially if it is over another group of people, the former proceeds to make radical moves to keep its position over the former. Weakness was not an option." 2842:

impossible to understand the white nationalist movement without acknowledging its conspicuous Catholic connections. The Occidental Quarterly, the most toxic white nationalist publication in the country, regularly pumps its readership with pro-Catholic, anti-Protestant propaganda. Protestantism, and especially mainline Protestantism, in their opinion, has "gone soft", become "too liberal", and -- well, less racist. The conservative publishing group "Regnery Publishing", founded by Catholic Alfred Regnery, whose cousin founded the alt-right, white nationalist National Policy Institute, is similarly overt in its publishing of books on "Western Civilization" and the Catholic Church (See, for example, Thomas Woods' "How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization").Their goal appears to be the creation of a pan-European national identity for the United States with origins in the traditional Roman Catholic Church (pre-Vatican II, whose ecumenical efforts they associate with a "Jewish hijacking" of Western culture).

2269:

nationalism, making it easier to understand why white nationalists often expouse white supremacist believes. Leninism and Stalinism our very closely related forms of Communism, but they are still different ideologies. If we don't specify that the white supremacy and white nationalism are different, we open the door to the claim that both of these ideologies are synonymous with Nazism as well. Yet America was essentially a white nationalist country during the 1930s to 1940s yet America fought Germany which was dominate by the Nazi ideology. I must state that I don't frequently edit articles or engage in conversations on Knowledge talk pages so my argumentation technique and wording might not be up to par with many other Users on this sight.

2768:

is synonymous with the concept of a "white nation," which is simply begging the question. To clarify: if a media figure were to say, "we should limit immigration because too many non-whites are coming in" -- Is that white nationalism? (Yes, it is, and the body is consistent with that). Now, is that "a proposed type of state in which residence or citizenship would be limited to white people and would exclude non-whites such as Blacks, non-White Hispanics, etc?" I don't think so. In raising the bar to the most extreme expression of an ideology, you are giving white nationalists an easy "out" to deny that they are white nationalists. (i.e., "X is not a white nationalist because they never advocated for a white ethnostate.")

1825:

Association for the Advancement of White People (NAAWP). White nationalism encompasses a large array of ideologies and practices, yet many dispute white nationalism’s conflation with, or reduction to, white supremacy. “White nationalism” proper is a movement to create or maintain a separate white nation-state, whereas “white supremacy” relies on social Darwinist, biological, or theological doctrine to rationalize a belief in inherent racial differences and hierarchy. However, many find such distinctions quite dubious, as a great deal of social scientific analysis indicates a large overlap between the two camps in terms of membership, ideology, and practical cooperation.

3002:"Race as a social construct" is argued in the same way as "gender as a social construct". That is to say, it is argued that the ability to undo or overlap the biological realities of race/gender render it to be a political decision. Quietly however, modern DNA studies have verified traditional racial models beyond a doubt. The major racial categories formed during tens of thousands of years of post-migration speciation and are biologically very real, with no competing or alternative theories, "yo". The opening of the article appears to be a specifically "anti-white" blurb since articles on other ethno-nationalist movements do not open by questioning their existence. 3708: 3477: 3588: 1530:“We saw that was becoming more of a thing, where they would try to normalize what they were doing by saying ‘I’m not racist, I’m a nationalist’, and try to make that distinction. They even go so far as to say ‘I’m not a white supremacist, I’m a white nationalist’. Time and time again they would say that but they would also have hateful speech and hateful behaviors tied to that,” Casseus said. “They’re trying to normalize it and based upon what we’ve seen and who we’ve talked to, we determined that this is hateful, and it’s tied to organized hate.” 1061:

than the 2% difference in DNA which separates humans from chimpanzees, for instance. If such minor differences as distinguish human "races" were found in a species other than humans, they would not be divided into fundamentally separate groupings such as are ascribed to "race".In other words, while there may be small, insignificant difference between what were once seen as separate "races", they are no big deal, not enough to ascribe such importance to, and the boundaries between them are extremely fluid and difficult to define.

2815:

solidarity. The other is from Philippe Rushton (going by memory here), who points out that on various biological or psychological measures (hormone levels, IQ scores, etc.), whites score in the middle of the spectrum, with blacks at one extreme and Asians at the other. He said something to the effect of, it is a strange form of "supremacy" that puts your own race in the middle! Of course there is still plenty of overlap, and a certain amount of this is just rhetoric. Thoughts? --Dawud

2097:, but the quantity of critics who point this out is almost overwhelming. Most analysts and academics who discuss this point recognize, at least in part, that the term is used as a more palatable alternative to "white supremacy", which is now less common as a self-description. It would be misleading to attribute this point to only a handful of critics, as this is more common than that. If you can think of a way to rephrase this, let's here it. 31: 1134:

Knowledge. Note that the reference here, , is behind a paywall too, with no option to read even an abstract. This paragraph does not seem to convey any sourced information about historic white nationalism in the US, but rather seems like a mocking interlude. Observing the paragraphs above and below this quoted part, it could be removed and no relevant information would be lost. I would therefore recommend deleting this paragraph.

1784:"White nationalism is a "new buzzword," Johnson said, but the first time he saw the term was in "white supremacy literature." The far rightists used "white nationalism" to appear more credible and patriotic, Johnson said, and the term detracts from the stereotypes conjured by white supremacy. But make no mistake, he argued, white nationalism is a euphemism. "They want to distance themselves from white supremacy," he said." 1755:"White nationalism is a term that originated among white supremacists as a euphemism for white supremacy. Eventually, some white supremacists tried to distinguish it further by using it to refer to a form of white supremacy that emphasizes defining a country or region by white racial identity and which seeks to promote the interests of whites exclusively, typically at the expense of people of other backgrounds." 2642:

I think his comments immediately following Unite the Right (2017) and his refusal to disavow David Duke and the KKK (Feb 2016) should be explained (currently not even mentioned), while the most recent incident targeting the 4 congresswomen should be mentioned, but not discussed in near the kind of depth it currently is. This is why I posted the tag after removing the paragraph, the work that remains.

3650: 3540: 3429: 3338: 3163: 2504:"other analysts" as saying something else, the article is falsely implying that this point is not accepted by these other sources. These source also support this point, although they may differ on where the specific lines fall. This is because the lines are largely drawn after the fact, which is not a problem Knowledge can fix, but it's also one we should not ignore. 872:(re. SPLC, and the word "often"): I just took a look at the source again and noticed that somehow, in my mind, I changed the location of the word "often" while I was reading their opening sentence (sub-header). You are right, "often" shouldn't be used. As for SPLC attribution, I would've agreed to that, but I believe Grayfell is correct, so I'm not sure anymore. 3370:

far too many facets as written. You attempt to attach pejorative groups to white nationalism. In the beginning, you define it as anyone would define Black nationalism, or nationalism any other ethnic group. If you stopped there, it would be alright. But you felt compelled to go on and connect the term with supremacists and other negative groups.

3235: 2066:(edit conflict)Also, as an afterthought, the whole idea is nonsensical. "Critics" of what, exactly? Critics of the existance of White Nationalism? Critics of the people that believe that all WN's are really WS? Even the word "critics" is to ambiguous to lend any meaning, as it fails to describe exactly what it is these people are critical 3387: 3513:

american as a reliable source in the future. Is there a source that I can cite to delegitimize the terms ancestry, population, and genetics as falling under an "essentialist fallacy"? Awaiting your or another editor's guidance to help me combat the evil of fallacious thinking in science being presented on wikipedia as if it were valid.

756:

the way to do this is by documenting these differences, not by ignoring them and picking our personal preference. Knowledge is, by default, descriptivist enough that this isn't a problem that we can solve. We can document this usage without passing judgement, and this was my intention in adding the CJR source here.

2112:

they say for balance, or reject their opinions completely as "fringe". Is this understanding correct, and if so, what is the status of White Nationalists? Are they allowed space in the Article to advocate their minority opinion, or are they shut-out completely as "fringe"? Please feel free to correct my language.

1599:"Civil rights groups applauded the move. “There is no defensible distinction that can be drawn between white supremacy, white nationalism or white separatism in society today,” Kristen Clarke, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, said Wednesday in a statement." 3369:

Far too many generalized terms like Many, Some, Frequently, Often, etc. It dilutes any factual basis you are attempting to establish. I think you should strive for specifics and use of statistics. As written, I can't honestly assess the value of what's in here. White nationalism is far too broad, has

3023:

Throwing the word "eugenics" out expecting a programmed reaction of terror from American public school attendees does not constitute an argument. Major human genetic categories (as well as some dog breeds) formed via longterm allopatric and sympatric speciation. I believe you are feigning an interest

2717:

This is not currently fleshed out in the body, but per NYT, believing in "maintaining a white majority" or "forging a white identity" is white nationalism. I do not believe there is warrant for raising the bar to advocating for a racially-defined or racially-exclusive state ("ethnostate"), which is a

2641:

I understand, and that sounds fine. However, I still think even that section would need some balancing. For instance, there are currently 2-to-3 paragraphs about Trumps most recent Twitter thread and this doesn't give the sense that this is just the most recent of many such inflammatory incidents.

2489:

Another recent area of confusion is the degree of overlap between the terms “white nationalist” and “white supremacist.” For many people the terms can be used almost interchangeably. Both terms describe groups that favor whites and support discrimination by race. There is however a subtle difference,

2158:

source can be found which explains how both positions are nonsense. If we start adding this kind of back-and-forth, we are falsely implying that these perspective are significant, or worse, that they are valid. We have to be very cautious about if and how we bother to mention this chatter. The way to

2153:

There are many reasons, so, so many reasons, why white nationalist sources are unreliable, even for information about the ideology itself. Just one simple starting point is that white nationalism is not coherent. Claims made by white nationalists about their own beliefs are constantly contradicted by

1869:

In terms of timeline, Johnson is more correct and knowing how Hughey backdates the definition of "White Nationalist" (which nobody before 1970 could possibly have used to self-identify) his quotes back up Johnson's analysis. White Supremacists started using the term "White Nationalist" as a euphemism

1824:

Sociologists often subsume white supremacist and white hate groups under the umbrella term white nationalism White nationalism applies to the Ku Klux Klan (KKK), neo-Nazis, militia movements, variants of the Christian Identity Church (CIC), and more “refined” political organizations like the National

1687:

It's the other way around, white supremacists (such as Richard Spencer) crafted the term because calling themselves white supremacists instantly makes them toxic even in conservative circles. The language inserted in the lede is misrepresenting the source based on the terms being used interchangeably

1617:

That's a good quote. I've used that to help bolster the explanation of the overlap in the lede. Previously, finding non-specialist sources which fully explained the connection was a bit tedious, at least for me. These sources help, so I'm glad there's more to work with. I'm not really sure how handle

786:

I dislike the idea of attributing the SPLC's statement as though it were an opinion. This isn't really an opinion, it's an expert analysis of something commonly described with ambiguous language. I don't think the SPLC is disagreeing with those people who use the term interchangeably. They are merely

343:

The two sources cited after the statement "White nationalism is sometimes described as a euphemism for, or subset of, white supremacy, and the two have been used interchangeably by journalists and other analysts" support the statement that "White nationalism is sometimes described as a euphemism for,

252:

Sure, I'll assume good faith the moment you show that you're an editor who's here to improve the encyclopedia and not on behalf of an ideology, which is what you appear to be now. AGF is not meant to be a set of blinders.In any case, as I said above, the two statements are not contradictory, nor are

3216:

It's clear that as it currently stands "race" is being referred to in a derogatory manner in white nationalism, and despite otherwise matching word for word in the sentences, black nationalism refers to the correct reference on race. There's enough negative stuff about being white in this wiki that

2814:

I can think of two points that the article did not bring up, that help explain the preference for "nationalism" over "supremacy." I suppose these should be added. One is that "white nationalism" suggests parallels with "black nationalism," and other socially-acceptable forms of nationalism or ethnic

2767:

White nationalism is inherently white supremacist because it is the promotion of whites to the exclusion of other groups. You are adding undue precision by adding that white nationalists are categorically attached to the idea of a white ethnostate -- without proper referencing beyond stating that it

2644:

My removal of the other material came from a desire to focus the section on mass movements/demonstrations (events like Unite the Right; official organizations that have seen a resurgence/rebranding) rather than individual actions, but I definitely understand why you think it should stay, and, again,

2606:

24 hours), and much of it focuses on very recent events. I removed one paragraph and tagged the section, planning to at least reword other parts of the section (21st century subsection of U.S. section). My edit was reverted with no reason given, just that I bring the issue here. To be clear, the

2549:

also supremacists and/or separatists, but according to the sources not all of them are separatists for example, because they want to rule over the non-whites in 'their' country (think apartheid South Africa) instead of having separate white and non-white states. It's like saying "police carry guns",

2419:

words to shift the emphasis to the other perspective. As for "dominate" this is a common white nationalist talking point, but this isn't the page to explain that. White supremacists only occasional admit to wanting to "dominate" other races, it's not clear what that "dominate" means in this context,

2111:

Well, since you seem to be in the mood to educate a newb (and thank you), maybe you can give me a greater sense of both structure and process. If the RS is overwhelming on a particular topic like this, then the way the encyclopedia deals with the "minority" opinion is to either include some of what

1830:

While some might dismiss these groups as fringe or radical outliers, there is some evidence that their membership and/or influence is growing. From 1992 to 2000, the number of hate groups (largely white in membership) increased from 300 to 602, and by 2010 there were 1,002 hate groups. That is a 7.5

1060:

Self-reported descriptive groupings for demographic purposes are not necessarily the same thing as the debatable concept of "race", which posits fundamental differences between different "races", while most modern scientists who have studied the differences see them as extremely minor, far, far less

799:

publications. Instead they use 'white nationalist'. It would be pretty absurd to infer from this that the SPLC doesn't believe there are any white supremacist organizations. Pretty much the only thing all of these sources agree on is that there is very close overlap. Most seem to agree also that the

3288:

Nothing about accurately labeling this scientific racism is inherently derogatory towards white people. If you look for "negative stuff", you will find it. If you look for positive stuff, you will also find it. The balance of positive vs. negative stuff should not be determined by the sensibilities

2932:

I've Never heard of "races" NOT being a real thing... denying the existence of the white race or black race or asian race is like denying the existence of different breeds of dogs. Humans use the word "race" instead of "breed" like we see used with horses and dogs. We are all the same human species

2782:

White nationalists don't need anyone's help to give themselves an out, or else they wouldn't have coined the term "white nationalist". The "less extreme" idea of restrictions on immigration based on ethnicity only appears reasonable in comparison to something even more nebulous. The degree to which

2507:

The SPLC is an authoritative source for hate groups and racist ideology. If it doesn't qualify its statement, that may be because it doesn't need to. The AP is an authoritative source for journalistic standards. We can use the SPLC for factual statements on ideology, and the AP for how these things

2414:

Nothing about the SPLC source contradicts the following statement, since espousing an ideology already implies overlapping and distinct, but your edit presented it as a minority opinion instead of as an accepted attribute. Since these other sources also support this point, this is using attribution

2193:

The sources used to promote the euphemism viewpoint are all onegatively critical of white nationalists. There ought to be balance by including views of white nationalists, since the article is about white nationalism. As an example, if I was seeking information about evolution, I would first ask an

1483:

Under the United States section, I read "This, consequently, instilled fear in the white population—would their race not reign supreme forever? Whenever a group is afraid of losing its identity and power, especially if it is over another group of people, the former proceeds to make radical moves to

1456:

This article has the tone of being relatively supportive of this terrorist group. Theres maybe three sentences describing alleged criticisms of white nationalism and none of them describe it as a terrorist group or the atrocities committed by its members. A majority of the acts of terror in America

1429:

755:

The term is used broadly by many journalists as a synonym or near-synonym for white supremacy. Some sources will only use one, some use the other, sometimes interchangeably, and only sometimes do they each describe genuinely different phenomena. We should, of course, be precise in our language, but

213:

of your edits have been to articles about the indentitarian movement. You say on your talk page that you are "a single-purpose account narrowly limited to improving Knowledge," but I think it's more likely that you're an SPA here to soften our coverage of identitarianism and other related subjects

108:

Should the second sentence be attributed, or else qualified? It seems odd to switch from "sometimes described as" to a direct identification in Knowledge's voice. My assumption is that the second sentence is supposed to be an example of the interchangeable use, if so, that should be said. Or should

2741:, it was added because someone thought it sounded better. Some specific political ideas have been attached to the name since then, but the concept is fundamentally simplistic. The goal is white supremacy, but described in political terms. Attempting to find some deep nuance in white nationalism is 2622:

I suggest that rather than remove the information, it be moved into a section about recent events. We are living through a time when white nationalism is on the ascendant, and removing material from this article simply because it happened recently will fail to give the reader a rounded picture of

2573:

How are they "distinct" in this context? Emphasizing this distinction, when the sources are specifically explaining the overlap, is still a form of editorializing. These three different terms are presumed to be distinct by default, since, among other things, we have distinct articles for all three

2027:

It's a controversial statement in a controversial Article and I don't believe the onus is on me to explain to myself why it violates Knowledge Policy when it seems obvious that it does. Nor why the first sentence in the section titled "criticism" needs to be repeated word-for-word and appended to

1102:

In all actuality, White is not a race, it is a sociopolitical construct that was first used by American Colonist's Bourgeois class in the year of 1681. Before this, there is no record of the European calling himself such. He identified himself as either Christian or English. Theodore Allen's book,

759:

I was prompted to add this sentence because I observed is a tendency for some to read more into news sources word choice than was appropriate. As the CJR source explains, journalists often use them interchangeably, so fixating on a newspaper's use of one over the other is not as informative as it

1742:

I am trying to find how I can get a full copy of the book again. It looks like this was written from what is available at the Google Books link and that cuts out a number of pages that should help explain what definition of "white nationalism" Hughey is using that manages to encompass full-blown

1133:

The way this part is written is a departure from the mostly descriptive style of the article as a whole. It is not a quote from a source, yet it sounds almost bedtime story-like, as if trying to link together parts of a larger tale while "enticing" with things to come, which is inappropriate for

2841:

A reader may be led to believe that contemporary white nationalism in the US is consistent with the Anglo-Protestant variety of the past, which it most certainly is not. Anyone who's spent any significant time researching contemporary hate culture in the United States knows that it is virtually

2503:

More blatantly, this is poor writing. The statement attributed to the SPLC is fully compatible with describing this as "overlapping but distinct concepts", making this filler. By emphasizing one statement from the SPLC as a specific opinion (which it is not) and then introducing vaguely defined

895:

There is a concerted effort by white supremacists to blur these terms' definitions when they are used by critics, and to sharpen the definitions when they choose to use them. To hear them say it, "white supremacy" means exactly what the "white advocate" says it means and and not what the social

128:

Ah... How would you think one would go about forming a "white nation" if there wasn't a separation between whites and non-whites? And what would be the point of starting a "white nation" if whites weren't superior to non-whites? Are you suggesting that white nationalists want to start a white

2486:

This is false precision which functionally whitewashes white nationalism. The gist of all of these sources is that the line is blurry, and further, it is made intentionally blurry by white supremacists as a way to make their ideology more palatable. The AP source you've added specifically says

3512:

But upon reading it for myself, they instead say "populations from a genetic perspective" and "where major ancestry originated" are important variables for scientific research. These euphemisms are exactly what the definition of race describes and that's problematic for determining scientific

3108:

to achieve desired results, with the selective breeding generally not self-managed by the breeders. That would apply re dog breeding much better than it would apply re human society. That could evolve into a long discussion, but I don't think this is the place to have such a discussion. I was

2511:

To put it another way, per sources, the existence of a white nationalist who isn't also functionally a white supremacist is strictly hypothetical. White nationalists are not presumed reliable, not even for describing their own beliefs, and these descriptions tend not to hold-up to any sort of

2252:

Saying this has been "linked" to white supremacy is, at best, an understatement, but also seems like it is implying a distinction. As was already explained, this distinction is fuzzy and contentious. Per currently cited sources, white nationalist groups espouse white supremacy. Highlighting a

1810:

Alright I was able to get a friend at a university to look the book up and provide me the text. Page 197, not shown in the Google Books preview, shows the problem with using this source to back up the line in the lede. Hughey's definition of "white nationalist" is using "white nationalism" to

680:

that everyone who edits in this area, sans one, apparently suffers from), and I'm pretty sure that others will join us as well in due course.The primary problem with your edit is that it does not reflect what the source says. The SPLC doesn't say that "some" white nationalists espouse white

376:

with a clear agenda, or else a troll only wanting to prolong debate,. People typically bring stuff to the talk page in order to build a consensus for changes they think need to be made. You, in your "innocence", don't want any change at all, except to clear up an inconsistency which isn't, a

2468:

The SPLC source says "white nationalist groups espouse white supremacy and white separatism" but doesn't qualify that statement. It's unclear if they mean all, most, or some. While it's true that many or most white nationalists do seem to espouse these things, the sources also say that not

2268:

To obfuscate the distinction between white nationalism and white supremacy is to be intellectually dishonest. Two ideologies can share many characteristics yet still be different ideologies. In addition, it is possible to argue that possible to argue that white supremacy is a form of white

748:

It's funny, but I'm just now realizing that I've had a couple of white nationalist apologists try and cite the CJR article to me in an attempt to legitimize their pedantic preferences. It's plausible that they got it from this article, so I guess we can call that Nazisplaining. Anyway...

3856:

Hi, I've done some extensive academic research on White Christian Nationalism for an academic capstone, a lot of it is relatively new, but does pass the sourcing criteria, I was thinking about adding it here, but I could also see it as an entirely separate sub article. What do you think?

2718:

violent political expression of white nationalism. One needn't limit citizenship to whites to be a white nationalist; advocating for the cultural hegemony of "the white race" in a country, without additional political prescriptions, is white nationalism. Additionally, I fail to see how

1834:

In broad strokes, white nationalism can be traced to eighteenth-century European philosophers and naturalists such as Hume, Kant, Linnaeus, and Georges-Louis Leclerc. These figures engaged in a collective promotion of racial supremacist doctrine as various European powers colonized the

167:

I'm... not suggesting anything? I'm just pointing out the weird incoherence between the two sentences. But if you're right, and "white nationalists are white supremacists" is something we can say in Knowledge's voice, why do we hedge with "sometimes described as" in the first sentence?

673:

about changing that wording. It is best to instead let the consensus process work itself out -- make suggestions here, and see what find of feedback it generates. We have, at this point, at least two un-conflicted editors involved in the discussion (doing the best we can despite the

2349:. Including this quote in the article isn't "cherry-picking", nor is it really contradicting the other sources – it's giving another interpretation, as Knowledge articles should do. Also, there's no rule on Knowledge that other sources must emphasize a quote for us to include it. ~ 532:

And it was reverted. As it probably should have, since my wording was not really great, and I believe I've missed a few subtleties about the topic. So, is the current version better than the one proposed above, or would anyone suggest some other version of the text in question?

2145:

With this in mind, white nationalists are not reliable sources for factual information, and Knowledge isn't a platform for promotion or advocacy. Therefore, we are not particularly interested in citing white nationalists, we are interested instead in citing reliable sources

1903:

I think that line should be reworded to read "White nationalists generally shifted after 1970 to identifying as "nationalists" because identifying with the term "supremacy" made it difficult for their ideas to gain traction." Include Johnson and ADL as primary sources.

3735:

article that may involve this subject. Are there any citations or evidence that Dixiecrats would fall into this category (white nationalism)? They were mainly white supremacist and pro segregation, which from my understanding, overlaps with white nationalism. Cheers.

3508:

The wikipedia article you linked to me has a single citation for your statement "modern scientists do not take it seriously.", phrased in the wikipedia article as "Modern science regards race as a social construct, an identity which is assigned based on rules made by

2783:

something is extreme is merely how far along on the path it is. In other words, the entire purpose of these finicky labels is so they can give themselves an out. To hear them tell it, "white nationalism" means exactly what they want it to mean, and nothing else.

2499:

It is very clear that these sources realize that emphasizing this supposed distinction is part of a tactical move by white supremacists/nationalists to present their ideology as more nuanced and more palatable than a plain reading of the facts would otherwise

475:(I must stress out - only that the sentences are inconsistent with each other). Yes, both of those are supported by reliable sources, but also - both of those are written without attribution; that is, in Knowledge's voice. However, there's an easy fix: 3787:

Throughout American history, European did not always mean white, take the Romani people for example. Irish people and Italians were also at some points considered nonwhite, I believe Irish people were also called the n word in the late 1800's America

2010:, where attribution is provided and this is explained with multiple sources. The lede is intended to be a summary of the body of the article, and sources can be provided in the lede, but this is not always necessary or desirable, for various reasons. 2154:

other white nationalists. If you feel a specific white nationalist perspective is useful in explaining the ideology, I can almost guarantee I can find an equally unreliable white nationalist source which refutes that perspective. Usually some other

2342: 2126:

Are you arguing that this article should become more of a platform for white nationalists? If you want other people to listen to you and respect your opinions, I strongly encourage you to think carefully about what you are suggesting, and

1457:

are committed by white nationalists, and this page talks about it like its a cool club. I would revise it, but I have little expertise with editing wikis and I would want it done correctly so that it doesn't immediately get changed back.

1430:

2476:

Lastly, most sources include "domination" (controlling, ruling over) in their definition of white supremacy. It doesn't matter that white supremacists might hide their wish to dominate non-whites, we should report what the sources say.

2366:

implies "not always described", and the article explains that white nationalists espouse white separatism and white supremacy. This context describes what the "link" is, instead of just throwing it out there as more homework for the

1725:. People who espouse white supremacist views are more likely to call themselves, and their views, white nationalists/separatists (or "white advocate", etc.) I think that's the gist, and I don't think anyone is disputing this, right? 984:

I'd like to see references to such debate. You can call them "whitish" and the term might allow for color grading, however that does not change the fact that natives of Europe breed less and are suffering planned mass immigration.

3024:

in this topic just to forward a political agenda or personal vendetta & that the opening lines are non-encyclopedic (is anyone looking up "white nationalism" attempting to determine whether caucasians/white people exist?).

2162:

The term was invented as a euphemism for white supremacy, and it's shifting foundation is a feature, not a bug. Without a self-consistent groundwork, there can be no real "advocacy" of the ideology which isn't also advocacy of

2574:

concepts. Isolating the SPLC quote still stinks of editorializing to me, since it's emphasizing this quote in isolation, dispute that the other cited sources largely support the underlying point, making it non-controversial.

395:, at least, am puzzled by the two statements, as they appear to me, as a reader of the article, to be at odds, and in need of clarification, regarding the question of whether white nationalism is a subset of white supremacy. 2415:

to imply skepticism, which is a form of editorializing. Additionally, "Other analysts see these three as overlapping but distinct concepts." is functionally redundant with the first sentence of the paragraph, but is using

3625:

Who really is Kofi Buenor Hadjor and should he be the only person on the page of white nationalism. It is much more diverse and extensive than kofi buenor hadjor. It has different layers and exstremists and falsification

1200:. Also, for journals, the publisher changes over time and is generally not useful. There are no style guideline or reference styleguide that recommends including publisher for journals. Further discussions should be at 1888:

This is incredibly useful, thank you. I've reformatted this quote a bit to make it easier on my eyes and preserve attribution. There's a lot of work to be done here, and I have some ideas, but it will take some time.

790:

The SPLC is strangely reluctant to use the term "white supremacist" in describing organizations, and perhaps this explains why. They sometimes do, but as an example, they don't tag organizations with the term in the

779: 2667:

I have no objection to individual actions being more succinctly presented, with fewer extraneous details, as long as the core of the incident is preserved. Also, similar incidents should be gathered together.

1980:

Critics argue that the term "white nationalism" and ideas such as white pride exist solely to provide a sanitized public face for white supremacy, and that most white nationalist groups promote racial violence.

2092:

I think it's clear that "critics" means those who oppose white nationalism. Specifically, those who actively oppose white nationalism as a concept, not merely as a term. I understand that this appears to be a

1103:

THE INVENTION OF THE WHITE RACE, will serve those who are truly seeking the truth. No one has black skin and no one has white skin hence, a sociopolitical construct.Sheik Way-El 04:57, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

3393:, please make more clear what exactly you want changed. As per the edit request template: "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y". 782:

by sources. I'm guessing most people reading already know this, though. The goal in this article should be to provide clarity to readers, but absolutely not to legitimize euphemisms or weaselly PR moves.

3681:

please add this from the splc to the page , "views" section. "White nationalist groups espouse white supremacist or white separatist ideologies, often focusing on the alleged inferiority of nonwhites."

2294:

However, it doesn't give any other views, such as the quite common view that the three are alike but slightly different. Several of the sources already in the lead note that they're slightly different.

259:. Absolutely coherent, absolutely consistent, positively not contradictory.I will admit, though, if I were a white nationalist or an identitarian, I'd much prefer the first statement to the second. 193:, in an edit which says he was "adjusting lede with sources", and both sentences are sourced, so, presumably, both represent what their sources say. They are not, in fact, in any way contradictory. 752:

I don't feel particularly strong attachment to the wording I added in February, and I'm surprised it's lasted as long as it has unchanged. That said, I don't personally see any contradiction here.

1715:

White nationalism has radically changed its tone ant timbre in an attempt to remain relevant. Today, nationalists widely shun their affiliation with formal white supremacy and hate-filled rhetoric.

1086: 681:

supremacy and white separatism, it says that espousing those ideologies is a characteristic of white nationalism, period. Thus, watering it down, as you did, does not reflect the source provided.

3218: 3031: 3009: 2201: 2288:

As you say, the distinction between the terms "white nationalist", "white supremacist" and "white separatist" is fuzzy and contentious. Therefor, we should give some of the different views, per

2253:

specific and obscure FBI quote in such a way that it contradicts other sources is cherry-picking. If a secondary source emphasizes this quote, or provides context for this quote let's see it.

1941: 1027:

How can non-whites exists if whites don't exist? If they are not a race and do not share any common morphology, how come they can identify each other physically? Do blacks or asians exist?

2378:. This is especially true for a quote being added to the lede. Emphasizing one opinion as more significant than the others is not NPOV, and while this source is usable, it's absolutely not 1574:

I know I know, some white supremacist admin-ass will lie and scream "sockpuppet" because they don't want this covered. Their action will be proof Knowledge admins are white supremacists.

1085:

White nationalism is non-controversially a belief that "white" is a race. Whether "white" actually is a race is controversial. As such, the current rendering best serves neutral POV.

1728:

The article would benefit from a summary of the history of the term "white nationalism" (as distinct from it's many close cousins), but I don't recall having seen any sources for this.

904: 2473:

of them are separatists for example. Thus, we shouldn't give the statement in Knowledge's own voice. We should write "The SPLC states that...", or even "it's a widespread view that..."

767:

use these terms, but this kind of thing would probably need attribution. Advice is subjective. Documenting that two terms have been used to describe the same thing is not subjective.

800:

distinction is very fuzzy. Some might draw sharp lines in theory, but absolutely none that I have seen dispute this fuzziness in practice. My major concern is that we don't provide

377:

contradiction which is not, and an incoherence which is perfectly understandable. So, I !vote "no change necessary", and leave you to use your debating techniques on someone else.

2845:

Unfortunately I can not find an RS as of yet. Only here have I found serious attention given to this subject, although I doubt that site qualifies as reliable under Wiki criteria.

135:

another polity -- perhaps we could put a state or two aside for them? -- or that the feel that they deserve their own nation even though they are inferior to non-whites?No, white

2327:"While many 'white nationalists' are also 'white supremacists' because they believe white people are inherently superior to other races, the terms are really not interchangeable" 1488:. In my experience, trying to clean up an article about such a controversial subject boldly can cause tension, so discussion is probably the best way to move forward with this. 2893: 2050:

The onus is on you to gain consensus for this change, same as always. The lede summarizes the body, and there is an entire section of the body of the article explaining this.

3490:, which thoroughly cites that modern scientists do not take it seriously. Like creationism, geocentrism, or flat-earthery, obvious pseudoscience can be referred to as such - 2623:

just what is happening in the world in relation to White nationalism. It will also have the effect of whitewashing (no pun intended) the article of important information.

1688:

by Hughey, who uses the term "white nationalist" and "white nationalism" to describe the KKK in the 1800s and white supremacist polices during Reconstruction and Jim Crow.

2134:, Knowledge is concerned with the academic mainstream, but this should not be confused with a popularity contest. White nationalism isn't merely a minority position, it is 1743:

white supremacist organizations and power structures like the KKK and Jim Crow from before the term was ever coined (according to Merriam-Webster it was first used in 1970

512:

on this and changed it to the version I suggested above. I believe that it removes the inconsistency and still carries the same meaning. Feel free to revert, of course. =)

2538:

I don't see why we should pay any heed to what white supremacists do. We should write this encyclopedia in a fair way based on what reliable sources say, and nothing else.

1014:

Please note that later on in the text it says "demographic shift in the United States towards non-whites brings a new culture that is intellectually and morally inferior."

1791: 1597: 273:

OK, if, as you say, white nationalist is, or is a subset of, white supremacy, should we not get rid of "sometimes described as" in the first sentence? Why the hedging?

96:

White nationalism is sometimes described as a euphemism for, or subset of, white supremacy, and the two have been used interchangeably by journalists and other analysts.

1522:

This should be reflected in the article. Facebook is including "White Nationalism" and "White Separatism" as hate categories indistinguishable from white supremacism.

627: 253:

they incoherent or inconsistent. One of them says what white nationalism is sometimes described as by some people, and the other says what white nationalism actually

113:

white nationalist groups? Alternatively, if there's enough sourcing for a direct equation, should we not get rid of "is sometimes described as" in the first sentence?

913: 2215:

Nice touch, equating white nationalism with evolution, but it's not going to fly. (Good try attempting to appeal to your audience, though.) White nationalism is a

3045:

I just stumbled across this article an hour or so ago, and this talk page section in the last few minutes. With that lack of grounding, I'll comment that the term

1301:

I've pointed to previous and current discussions where this has been discussed, as well as pointed to policies and guidelines which further supports my claim. Per

903:). After a few missteps, more recent news coverage seems to have gotten a bit wiser to this trick and have discussed the term's euphemistic nature more directly: 403:

head when reading it, that's fine I guess, though you don't seem to be able to tell me whether, per the sources, white nationalism is a subset of white supremacy.

2561:

see the three concepts as overlapping but distinct. I haven't seen a convincing argument why we should exclude that fact, and the SPLC statement doesn't cover it.

2508:

are described by media. Both of these sources (as mere examples) support the point that emphasizing this distinction is only of limited utility in most contexts.

1627: 1556: 3460:

Citation doesn't support this characterization, nor is it a direct quote of someone giving their opinion, so the phrasing constitutes original research as is.

2292:. The article already notes that some journalists and analysts have used the terms interchangeably, and that some critics see them as identical, which is fine. 2013:

There are certainly many, many more sources which explain this perspective, also, so if you are sincerely disputing this, you have your work cut out for you.

896:

scientist or journalist says it means. This is not an accident, it has been a documented tactic for decades (they may be pretentious, but they are not subtle:

915:

The tricky part is figuring out how to explain all this in a neutral, balanced way. Cautious is good, but there is a nasty cost to being overcautious, also.

220:

suggesting something, the removal of the second "bald" sentence, because that would be beneficial to the coverage of your movement. Every little bit helps.

2564:

Your main worry seems to be that we're overstating the distinction. I agree we shouldn't do that, but we can avoid that by simply re-wording things a bit. ~

3100:

No, and the focus of this article isn't re dog breeding, it is re the human society. I didn't think about this carefully, but I guess I take the term

234:

Could you please, just for a moment, assume good faith? I'm saying that there's an inconsistency, or at least incoherence, between the two sentences.

2495:' (emphasis mine). This is a summary paragraph for the entire article, not merely the most convenient paragraph. That paragraph, however, also says 940:

This first sentence has a really bad smell to it. It should be changed to read "White nationalism is a type of nationalism or pan-nationalism which

2886:

Are they not? If they are not, then the espousing of the belief that black, hispanic, asian etc. people are a race would therein also be invalid.

2790:

is equally shaky, and equally susceptible to these kinds of rhetorical games, and it would be good for the article to indicate this more clearly.

1751:"). Compare with Anti-Defamation League definitions page "Defining Extremism: A Glossary of White Supremacist Terms, Movements and Philosophies": 908: 3289:

of specific editors. Comparisons to other articles about other ideologies are seldom persuasive, because that would ignore history and context.

3279:. Since it is likely that whoever added that link intended it to go to 'race', this intention should be preserved pending consensus, although 3572: 3204:

Would like the references to match, since they are the same thing. Therefore would propose the current reference for "Race" be altered to be

623: 2933:

and can all reproduce with one another, but different races/breeds of people exist, none of which are better than another. We are all equal

1811:

essentially encompass white supremacy despite the term not being coined until 1970. I hope I'm not out of line posting the block as a quote.

3803: 2362:

Again, "linked" is worse than useless to describe this connection. It doesn't explain anything useful to readers. I've seen those sources.

1905: 1875: 1795: 1764: 1695: 1335: 1135: 1034: 992: 901: 3802:

This is speculation that they weren't considered white. By whom? Which nationwide poll was done? Prove it beyond a vague citation or two.

2722:

can be properly accounted for if the lede defines white nationalism as attachment to a polity. I am interested to hear further thoughts.

1553: 358:

Yes, indeed. But do the sources, collectively, go as far as supporting the notion that white nationalism is a subset of white supremacy?

3756: 2822: 2737:

As the article explains, the term was coined specifically as a euphemism for white supremacy. "Nationalist" was not added because it is

2138:, and further, it is anathema to civil discourse and specifically to Knowledge's mission itself. Knowledge isn't a platform for sharing 1464: 1437: 2313:"While white nationalism certainly overlaps with white supremacy and racism, many political scientists say it is a distinct phenomenon" 1989:"Claims about what people say, think, feel, or believe, and what has been shown, demonstrated, or proved should be clearly attributed." 1792:

https://mic.com/articles/183739/white-supremacy-vs-white-nationalism-here-are-the-differences-between-the-far-right-factions#.kQ2VyElpN

1568: 1090: 3692: 3222: 3035: 3013: 2607:

current (distended) version of the article is not the consensus/stable version. I am open to hearing what other editors here think.--

2205: 1118: 3371: 3268: 3199: 1945: 1849: 1581: 1538: 1179: 2420:(is genocide "domination"? is segregation?) and introducing this point here is only adding confusing to an already fuzzy concept. 669:

When the specific wording of a part of an article is under discussion on the talk page is, in general. not a very good time to be

153:

not to be both a white supremacist and a white separatist, since those are necessary conditions for there to be a "white nation".

141:

do not necessarily have to be white nationalists, since they could simply be the rulers of the non-whites in a country, and white

3114: 947:

I don't know and cannot imagine what wording in the book cited gave this editor the idea that the racial identity of whites is a

899: 897: 72: 67: 59: 2345:(which is already used several times in the article) says that white supremacy and separatism are subsets of white nationalism: 2333: 1559: 3594:

it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a

2347:"not all white nationalists are supremacists or separatists, but all white supremacists and separatists are white nationalists" 2289: 2897: 1557:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/03/27/facebook-says-it-will-now-block-white-nationalist-white-separatist-posts/

3409: 3084:

denying the existence of the white race or black race or asian race is like denying the existence of different breeds of dogs

2978:

denying the existence of the white race or black race or asian race is like denying the existence of different breeds of dogs

1412: 1369: 1322: 1268: 1225: 695:

Speaking of which, I wouldn't object if that statement was altered to say "According to the Southern Poverty Law Center...".

1761: 3494:. At any rate, you'd need to get consensus for a change like this, not just a single editor's agreement to make the edit. 2305: 372:

The sources support the statements they support.You know, your devil's advocate pose does not hide the fact that you're a

2550:

without any qualification. While that statement is true, it overlooks the fact that a few police forces don't carry guns.

483:, and the two have been used interchangeably by journalists and other analysts as white nationalist groups often espouse 2938: 2871: 1562: 1526:

After speaking to these experts, Facebook decided that white nationalism and white separatism are “inherently hateful.”

937:"White nationalism is a type of nationalism or pan-nationalism which holds the belief that white people are a race..." 3487: 3205: 3195: 2948: 3755:

Please delete "yet white nationalists sometimes exclude Spaniards, Italians and Greeks." due to lack of a citation.

3686: 2749:, among other things, but it is especially fruitless because of the far-right's love of infighting and sectarianism. 641: 1778: 910: 592: 3595: 2512:

scrutiny. The article should not imply nuance where none exists, and white nationalism is not a coherent ideology.

1201: 966:

Given the scientific debates about race, Knowledge simply cannot make such an "acknowledgement". It's not a fact.

491:

I'm not sure if that's grammatically correct, or if it adheres to the MOS, but at least it's not as contradictory.

306: 38: 1719:

A second tenet of white nationalist thought is their collective shunning of the titles "racist" and "supremacist."

3113:. Likewise, the question of white/black/asian/etc. as a racial classification of humans is better discussed at 1647: 1565: 906: 3778: 3576: 1909: 1879: 1799: 1768: 1699: 1183: 1180:

User talk:Citation bot/Archive 11#Publishers being deleted & specific pages being changed to page ranges...

1139: 1038: 996: 424: 305:

aware of how we write and source articles, yes? That we don't make it up as we go along? That we report what

3807: 344:

or subset of, white supremacy, and the two have been used interchangeably by journalists and other analysts".

3760: 2934: 2826: 1468: 1441: 3696: 3656: 3546: 3435: 3344: 3169: 2703: 2673: 2632: 2228: 1292: 1066: 838: 728: 700: 686: 430: 382: 349: 329:

OK. Do the sources, collectively, support the notion that white nationalism is a subset of white supremacy?

320: 264: 225: 198: 158: 3793: 3836: 3774: 3631: 3091: 2993: 2968: 2915: 2117: 2075: 2033: 1996: 1163: 1114: 912:

Unite the Right made it harder to ignore. Regardless, it's been there this whole time, and people noticed.

47: 17: 3571:

White in White people isn't capitalized, but the Black in Black people is. Perhaps this should be fixed?

2627:-- an explanatory essay and not core policy -- is no excuse not to cover the subject at hand adequately. 3741: 3499: 3375: 3105: 2850: 1605: 1585: 1542: 1346: 1194: 1187: 972: 956: 824: 714: 675: 408: 363: 334: 278: 243: 173: 118: 1484:

keep its position over the former. Weakness was not an option." This is unsourced and seems a lot like

813: 690: 502: 3789: 2846: 2545:) is true, but it's much too simplistic to be given in Knowledge's own voice. Many white nationalists 1749:

one of a group of militant whites who espouse white supremacy and advocate enforced racial segregation

1554:

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/nexpbx/facebook-bans-white-nationalism-and-white-separatism

315:, there's no need for a change, as there is no "inconsistency", no "contradiction", no "incoherence". 3627: 3121: 3057: 3027: 3005: 2984:

of its own position, considering that breeds of dogs are created and maintained by the equivalent of

2889: 2818: 2658: 2612: 2197: 1937: 1691: 1577: 1534: 1460: 1433: 1106: 1030: 988: 2882:

The article (yes article, not definition) states "espouses the belief that white people are a race".

1569:

https://www.engadget.com/2019/03/27/facebook-instagram-white-nationalism-separatism-ban-hate-speech/

3715: 3518: 3483: 3465: 3255: 2773: 2727: 2624: 1244: 879: 540: 519: 498: 2319: 775: 566: 399:, the second statement fairly clearly implies "yes", while the first hedges. If it's all clear in 3866: 3405: 3294: 3050: 2795: 2754: 2719: 2699: 2669: 2628: 2579: 2517: 2425: 2387: 2278: 2258: 2224: 2176: 2102: 2055: 2018: 1961: 1894: 1744: 1733: 1671: 1506: 1398: 1355: 1308: 1288: 1254: 1240: 1211: 1182:, and reading the quote "Whether the publisher needs to be included depends on the type of work. 1062: 920: 867: 834: 809: 724: 696: 682: 604: 426: 378: 345: 316: 260: 221: 194: 154: 3420:"fallacy" of racial essentialism should be altered to "concept" or "idea" of racial essentialism 2910:

I don't think anybody believes that "races" are real things, yo. "Racialization" is a process.

2696: 1685:"White nationalists generally avoid the term "supremacy" because it has negative connotations." 299:

says. No, we should not get rid of "sometimes described as" if that's what the source says.You

3820: 3660: 3599: 3550: 3439: 3348: 3280: 3272: 3173: 3087: 2989: 2952: 2911: 2375: 2220: 2168: 2113: 2071: 2029: 2007: 1992: 1846: 1158: 1110: 3316:

Heidi Beirich and Kevin Hicks. "Chapter 7: White nationalism in America". In Perry, Barbara.

1560:

https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/27/18284174/facebook-ban-white-nationalist-separatist-content

819:

Sounds like two slightly different, but equally valid, uses of the term "white nationalist"?

3737: 3495: 3049:

seems to me to have been used here as not entirely appropriate shorthand for something like

2787: 2416: 2216: 2135: 2094: 1985: 1600: 1489: 1395:

was added/present, which already links to the same place/to the index, which is preferable.

967: 952: 820: 710: 484: 472: 404: 359: 330: 274: 239: 207:

Oh, as to you "not suggesting anything"... I guess it's just a coincidence that pretty much

169: 114: 951:

and not a fact. But this sentence is nonetheless glaringly preposterous and requires a fix.

3118: 3054: 2742: 2654: 2650: 2608: 2164: 2131: 1932: 1722: 1154: 862:

like the sentence could use some tweaking, but hell, I have no idea how/what to change. =)

801: 616: 480: 3714:

this is already covered in the article, and your proposed addition has copyright issues.

2565: 2478: 2405: 2350: 1762:

https://www.adl.org/education/resources/glossary-terms/defining-extremism-white-supremacy

3869: 3839: 3811: 3797: 3782: 3764: 3745: 3720: 3700: 3635: 3614: 3580: 3522: 3503: 3469: 3413: 3379: 3298: 3260: 3226: 3131: 3095: 3067: 3039: 3017: 2997: 2971: 2942: 2919: 2901: 2854: 2830: 2799: 2777: 2758: 2731: 2707: 2677: 2662: 2636: 2616: 2583: 2568: 2521: 2481: 2429: 2408: 2391: 2353: 2282: 2262: 2232: 2209: 2180: 2121: 2106: 2079: 2059: 2037: 2022: 2000: 1965: 1949: 1913: 1898: 1883: 1803: 1772: 1737: 1703: 1675: 1608: 1589: 1546: 1511: 1494: 1472: 1445: 1419: 1376: 1329: 1296: 1275: 1232: 1168: 1143: 1094: 1070: 1042: 1000: 975: 960: 924: 883: 842: 828: 732: 718: 704: 544: 523: 434: 412: 386: 367: 353: 338: 324: 282: 268: 247: 229: 202: 177: 162: 122: 3770:

Please delete "yet white nationalists sometimes exclude Spaniards, Italians and Greeks.

3514: 3491: 3461: 3276: 3243: 2769: 2723: 2382:

for one editor to pick a quote from it as their preferred summary of the entire topic.

1305:

it is now your turn to provide discussions, policies or other arguments for your view.

873: 670: 534: 513: 509: 492: 373: 1831:

percent increase from the 932 groups active in 2009 and a 66 percent rise since 2000.

1336:

Help_talk:Citation_Style_1/Archive_1#Publisher_parameter_in_Cite_journal_documentation

3861: 3394: 3290: 2872:

https://sojo.net/magazine/august-2020/catholic-church-has-visible-white-power-faction

2791: 2750: 2575: 2513: 2421: 2383: 2379: 2274: 2254: 2172: 2098: 2051: 2014: 1957: 1890: 1729: 1667: 1502: 1404: 1361: 1314: 1302: 1260: 1248: 1217: 1205: 916: 853: 805: 787:

trying to clearly summarize a term with an intentionally messy, euphemistic history.

185: 1596:

That's a stupid statement. I'm a long time Admin and I was going to bring this here.

1563:

https://thehill.com/policy/436055-facebook-to-ban-white-nationalism-white-separatism

2746: 2404:. What exactly is wrong with it or how does it go against any Knowledge policies? ~ 2219:

viewpoint, and therefore giving it equal weight with mainstream views results in a

2139: 1485: 3687:

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/ideology/white-nationalist

3217:

there is no need to add additional derogatory statements where they don't belong.

147:

can advocate for "separate but equal", but it makes entirely no sense for a white

1779:

https://www.cnn.com/2016/11/16/politics/what-is-white-nationalism-trnd/index.html

760:

might otherwise seem. I think this is worth mentioning just to avoid confusion.

2738: 46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

2441:

The first line says that some see "white nationalism" and "white supremacy" as

804:

to those apologists who try to emphasize a level of subtly that doesn't exist.

2693: 2374:, then yes, we need a reliable, independent source summarizing it for us, per 1500:

I think that entire paragraph is unsourced, essay-ish, and should be removed.

1566:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/27/tech/facebook-white-nationalism-ban/index.html

3732: 2976:

I do not want to go all FORUM on this topic, either, but the statement that

2445:

and use the terms interchangeably – that statement is backed by the sources.

2194:

evolutionary biologist. It would not make much sense to ask a Creationist.

771: 2688:

Centralized discussion about possible bad information added to this article

1628:"Facebook says it will now block white-nationalist, white-separatist posts" 479:

White nationalism is sometimes described as a euphemism for, or subset of,

2497:

Critics accuse white nationalists of being white supremacists in disguise.

3194:

This is the reference made for the "Race" portion of Black Nationalism.

2985: 1619: 3816:

Don't be daft... how do you do a nationwide poll of people in the 1800s?

3212:

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Black_nationalism&action=edit

3198:

This is the reference made for the "Race" portion of White Nationalism

3074:

breeds of dogs are created and maintained by the equivalent of Eugenics

1843:

White Bound: Nationalists, Antiracists, and the Shared Meanings of Race

2028:

the Lede, nor does this section name any actual critics that say this.

1202:

Help talk:Citation Style 1#Removal of publisher and publisher location

1190:

I sense there is wide-spread wiki-consensus to remove publishers from

1126:

The tone of this section seems very different to the rest of the page.

892:

Yup, I feel the same way, and also don't really know how to adjust it.

104:

White nationalist groups espouse white separatism and white supremacy.

3242:. The link was formerly to a redirect where the destination changed. 2745:. Comparing and contrasting these different incoherent ideologies is 2602:

A huge amount of text was just added to the article (within the last

593:"White nationalism, a term once on the fringes, now front and center" 3773:

This is rather odd. Aren't Spaniards, Italians and Greeks European?

3086:, which was an odd piece of dog whistling if I have ever heard one. 1648:"Facebook bans white nationalism two weeks after New Zealand attack" 1186:

suggest it should be for books, but not necessarily other works" at

3731:

Question for editors here, as there is a current discussion on the

3277:

Talk:Racialism#Which target? Racism or Race (human categorization)

2543:"white nationalists espouse white supremacy and white separatism" 1155:

Talk:Steve King#RfC: Most openly affiliated with white nationalsm

471:

I don't like playing Devil's advocate, but I somewhat agree with

2371: 1710:

This is an interesting point, could you expand on this, please?

3644: 3534: 3423: 3332: 3157: 1745:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/white%20nationalist

1618:

these, though. For convenience, here's the sources I added to

567:"The key difference between 'nationalists' and 'supremacists'" 25: 2460:

use them interchangeably – that's also backed by the sources.

238:, but we should at least say something that reads clearly. 92:

In the second paragraph, the first sentence is, carefully,

1931:"White Nationalist" is just a rebranding ploy by the KKK. 1342:)), stating that publisher is not to be commonly used for 1991:

2) Because there is no citation to support the statement.

723:

I am not concerned with the opinions of SPA sockpuppets.

3211: 3104:

as including selective breeding to apply principles of

2401: 2370:

When the source is an obscure FBI photocopy issued via

2246: 1933:

https://www.apnews.com/b0256e138327481ebcba6e23e2d03957

763:

The CJR source also provides advice on how journalists

678: 190: 2167:. We already have an article for that, and unreliable 709:

Yes, I think such attribution would solve the issue.

1479:

Some of the content here really seems unencyclopedic

3210:The full source for black nationalism can be found 3076:? I have reliable sources for that. My comment was 2951:. But this is not the space to opine on the topic. 2810:"white nationalism" / "white supremacy" distinction 1683:This line in the lede has the situation backwards. 391:I'm really just trying to clear up some confusion. 1281:You "sense" there is a consensus, can you show an 2452:see "white nationalism" and "white supremacy" as 2159:do this is through reliable, independent sources. 1626:Romm, Tony; Dwoskin, Elizabeth (March 27, 2019). 2837:Catholic links to contemporary white nationalism 1822: 1396: 1353: 1306: 1252: 1209: 3641:Semi-protected edit request on 2 February 2022 3109:quibbling about the applicability of the term 2336:which notes the differences between the terms. 858:I'm satisfied with that explanation, though I 3751:Definitions of Whiteness section edit request 2713:Necessity of a belief in a "white ethnostate" 2465:Why should one be included and the other not? 1452:This article needs to be completely rewritten 1425:This article needs to be completely rewritten 8: 2492:at least in the views of the groups involved 1976:I deleted the following line from the Lede: 3329:Semi-protected edit request on 4 April 2021 3275:in November after this relevant discussion: 3154:Semi-protected edit request on 9 March 2021 2649:of the section, I think still suffers from 1391:I removed url's to e.g. doi.org, since the 626:) CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list ( 3531:Semi-protected edit request on 24 May 2021 3025: 3003: 2887: 2816: 2195: 1935: 1689: 1575: 1532: 1458: 1431: 1104: 1028: 986: 3320:. Greenwood Publishing, 2009. pp.114–115 1208:, this seems to have further consensus. 1188:Help:Citation Style 1#Work and publisher 833:No, it does not sound like that at all. 3309: 2864: 1087:2605:A601:70E0:3100:B4A3:2905:44EB:ACEA 557: 3219:2603:8081:2F06:5A2:A5EB:8220:FB78:71ED 3083: 3073: 3032:2601:1C0:C801:9FA0:CCD1:E9D1:195A:A6E3 3010:2601:1C0:C801:9FA0:CCD1:E9D1:195A:A6E3 2977: 2496: 2488: 2363: 2202:2600:1012:B100:AE13:34DF:96A6:2EF:4312 1718: 1714: 1392: 612: 602: 478: 103: 95: 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 3283:is also perfectly valid in this case. 2692:Please see the discussion started by 1874:white supremacy had become toxic PR. 1845:. Stanford University Press. p. 197. 770:There is also a lot of overlap with " 7: 1942:2600:1:C6F3:11C0:616E:CE62:23F1:C24E 1646:O'Sullivan, Donie (March 27, 2019). 3819:The uncited part has been removed. 3267:For clarity, the article linked to 565:Perlman, Merrill (14 August 2017). 100:The very next sentence is, baldly, 3271:, which is was made a redirect to 2456:(but instead closely related) and 24: 3269:Racialism (racial categorization) 1153:Please consider participating at 944:that white people are a race..." 3706: 3648: 3586: 3538: 3475: 3427: 3385: 3336: 3233: 3161: 3115:talk:Race (human categorization) 2786:That said, the entire idea of a 2653:on certain very-recent events.-- 29: 1518:Facebook Bans White Nationalism 1178:After long discussions at e.g. 933:White people are NOT a race ??? 182:Both sentences were written by 3765:07:05, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 2894:2605:A000:1124:41BA:0:0:0:1004 2448:The other line says that some 2171:aren't welcome there, either. 1972:Deleted "critics" text in Lede 622:CS1 maint: extra punctuation ( 1: 3040:13:12, 9 September 2020 (UTC) 3018:13:03, 9 September 2020 (UTC) 2998:18:07, 2 September 2020 (UTC) 2972:16:45, 2 September 2020 (UTC) 2943:16:32, 2 September 2020 (UTC) 2800:00:05, 29 February 2020 (UTC) 2778:19:42, 28 February 2020 (UTC) 2759:09:06, 28 February 2020 (UTC) 2732:08:05, 28 February 2020 (UTC) 1721:followed by some waffle from 1420:22:28, 24 November 2018 (UTC) 1377:22:26, 24 November 2018 (UTC) 1330:22:18, 24 November 2018 (UTC) 1297:21:54, 24 November 2018 (UTC) 1276:21:49, 24 November 2018 (UTC) 1233:21:47, 24 November 2018 (UTC) 1095:02:05, 14 February 2018 (UTC) 1071:21:16, 13 December 2017 (UTC) 1043:21:09, 13 December 2017 (UTC) 1001:21:05, 13 December 2017 (UTC) 3870:00:08, 22 January 2023 (UTC) 3840:20:48, 31 October 2022 (UTC) 3812:20:38, 31 October 2022 (UTC) 3798:17:07, 31 October 2022 (UTC) 3783:10:56, 29 October 2022 (UTC) 3721:22:22, 2 February 2022 (UTC) 3701:21:56, 2 February 2022 (UTC) 3053:(generally self-selective). 1645: 1169:00:19, 8 November 2018 (UTC) 1144:23:50, 30 October 2018 (UTC) 466: 3852:White Christian Nationalism 3675:to reactivate your request. 3663:has been answered. Set the 3565:to reactivate your request. 3553:has been answered. Set the 3488:Race (human categorization) 3454:to reactivate your request. 3442:has been answered. Set the 3363:to reactivate your request. 3351:has been answered. Set the 3188:to reactivate your request. 3176:has been answered. Set the 3132:13:18, 2 October 2020 (UTC) 3096:11:45, 2 October 2020 (UTC) 3068:11:39, 2 October 2020 (UTC) 2949:Race (human categorization) 2855:22:58, 31 August 2020 (UTC) 2008:White nationalism#Criticism 976:18:49, 16 August 2017 (UTC) 961:17:29, 16 August 2017 (UTC) 925:05:59, 24 August 2018 (UTC) 884:14:29, 23 August 2018 (UTC) 843:05:03, 23 August 2018 (UTC) 829:06:43, 22 August 2018 (UTC) 814:06:30, 22 August 2018 (UTC) 733:05:19, 22 August 2018 (UTC) 719:05:08, 22 August 2018 (UTC) 705:05:02, 22 August 2018 (UTC) 691:04:59, 22 August 2018 (UTC) 646:Southern Poverty Law Center 545:03:50, 22 August 2018 (UTC) 524:03:33, 22 August 2018 (UTC) 503:03:27, 22 August 2018 (UTC) 435:01:59, 22 August 2018 (UTC) 413:01:28, 22 August 2018 (UTC) 387:01:19, 22 August 2018 (UTC) 368:01:14, 22 August 2018 (UTC) 354:01:11, 22 August 2018 (UTC) 339:01:06, 22 August 2018 (UTC) 325:01:01, 22 August 2018 (UTC) 283:00:50, 22 August 2018 (UTC) 269:00:43, 22 August 2018 (UTC) 248:23:45, 21 August 2018 (UTC) 230:23:36, 21 August 2018 (UTC) 203:23:29, 21 August 2018 (UTC) 178:23:16, 21 August 2018 (UTC) 163:23:10, 21 August 2018 (UTC) 123:22:23, 21 August 2018 (UTC) 3885: 3523:21:18, 23 April 2021 (UTC) 3504:04:35, 22 April 2021 (UTC) 3470:03:40, 22 April 2021 (UTC) 2920:15:15, 5 August 2020 (UTC) 2902:14:01, 5 August 2020 (UTC) 2584:06:11, 28 March 2019 (UTC) 2569:16:16, 23 March 2019 (UTC) 2522:22:35, 22 March 2019 (UTC) 2482:20:32, 21 March 2019 (UTC) 2430:19:51, 21 March 2019 (UTC) 2409:19:43, 21 March 2019 (UTC) 2392:02:26, 21 March 2019 (UTC) 2354:01:41, 21 March 2019 (UTC) 2321:Colombia Journalism Review 2263:00:02, 21 March 2019 (UTC) 1966:06:45, 29 March 2019 (UTC) 1950:06:25, 29 March 2019 (UTC) 1914:12:02, 29 March 2019 (UTC) 1899:06:45, 29 March 2019 (UTC) 1884:03:16, 29 March 2019 (UTC) 1804:00:46, 29 March 2019 (UTC) 1773:00:02, 29 March 2019 (UTC) 1738:23:49, 28 March 2019 (UTC) 1704:21:44, 28 March 2019 (UTC) 1676:06:56, 28 March 2019 (UTC) 1609:19:57, 27 March 2019 (UTC) 1590:17:38, 27 March 2019 (UTC) 1547:17:44, 27 March 2019 (UTC) 1473:20:37, 15 April 2019 (UTC) 1446:20:34, 15 April 2019 (UTC) 571:Columbia Journalism Review 214:-- so, I really think you 3746:18:56, 20 June 2022 (UTC) 3636:03:12, 15 July 2021 (UTC) 3414:07:10, 4 April 2021 (UTC) 3380:06:03, 4 April 2021 (UTC) 3299:08:22, 9 March 2021 (UTC) 3261:08:06, 9 March 2021 (UTC) 3227:07:44, 9 March 2021 (UTC) 2831:23:06, 24 July 2020 (UTC) 2708:18:13, 29 July 2019 (UTC) 2678:05:41, 18 July 2019 (UTC) 2663:03:40, 18 July 2019 (UTC) 2637:03:15, 18 July 2019 (UTC) 2617:02:33, 18 July 2019 (UTC) 2559:"many political analysts" 2283:03:09, 14 July 2019 (UTC) 2233:00:02, 19 June 2019 (UTC) 2210:23:52, 18 June 2019 (UTC) 1512:16:07, 9 April 2019 (UTC) 1495:10:55, 9 April 2019 (UTC) 1387:Regarding removal of URLs 236:Either one could be fixed 3615:10:06, 24 May 2021 (UTC) 3581:08:21, 24 May 2021 (UTC) 3391:Not done – empty request 2334:Associated Press article 2181:03:16, 19 May 2019 (UTC) 2142:, nor for false balance. 2122:23:51, 18 May 2019 (UTC) 2107:06:06, 16 May 2019 (UTC) 2080:05:56, 16 May 2019 (UTC) 2060:05:53, 16 May 2019 (UTC) 2038:05:50, 16 May 2019 (UTC) 2023:23:11, 15 May 2019 (UTC) 2001:23:06, 15 May 2019 (UTC) 1841:Hughey, Matthew (2012). 1334:But sure, howabout e.g. 1184:Knowledge:Citing sources 417:Why don't you edit with 293:say? You mean what the 3691:Ty and have a nice day 3072:Are you disputing that 1747:and its definition is " 1713:Per the Hughly source: 797:The Intelligence Report 774:", which has also been 2364:...sometimes described 1858: 1338:(that's in archvie 1 ( 18:Talk:White nationalism 3106:Mendelian inheritance 942:acknowledges the fact 676:out-group homogeneity 42:of past discussions. 2982:reductio ad absurdum 2541:The SPLC statement ( 591:CNN, Joe Sterling,. 487:and white supremacy. 3484:Racial essentialism 1790:And an overview at 1174:Removing publishers 642:"White Nationalist" 309:say? In any case, 307:WP:reliable sources 3621:Kofi Buenor Hadjor 3612: 3051:selective breeding 2935:Wearetheresistance 2892:comment added 9by 2720:National Anarchism 2645:that's fine. The 2605: 2150:white nationalism. 615:has generic name ( 467:Let's take a break 3679: 3678: 3661:White nationalism 3600: 3569: 3568: 3551:White nationalism 3458: 3457: 3440:White nationalism 3367: 3366: 3349:White nationalism 3281:scientific racism 3273:scientific racism 3259: 3192: 3191: 3174:White nationalism 3130: 3117:than here, IMHO. 3066: 3042: 3030:comment added by 3020: 3008:comment added by 2980:is pretty much a 2904: 2833: 2821:comment added by 2603: 2221:false equivalence 2212: 2200:comment added by 2140:original research 1984:1) Because it is 1952: 1940:comment added by 1706: 1694:comment added by 1592: 1580:comment added by 1549: 1537:comment added by 1486:original research 1475: 1463:comment added by 1448: 1436:comment added by 1278: 1167: 1122: 1109:comment added by 1045: 1033:comment added by 1003: 991:comment added by 88:Odd inconsistency 85: 84: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 3876: 3864: 3833: 3830: 3827: 3824: 3718: 3710: 3709: 3670: 3666: 3652: 3651: 3645: 3611: 3610: 3607: 3604: 3598:if appropriate. 3590: 3589: 3560: 3556: 3542: 3541: 3535: 3479: 3478: 3449: 3445: 3431: 3430: 3424: 3401: 3398: 3389: 3388: 3358: 3354: 3340: 3339: 3333: 3321: 3314: 3253: 3246: 3241: 3237: 3236: 3183: 3179: 3165: 3164: 3158: 3124: 3060: 2965: 2962: 2959: 2956: 2874: 2869: 2788:white ethnostate 2332:I also found an 2290:Knowledge policy 1856: 1855: 1662: 1660: 1658: 1642: 1640: 1638: 1603: 1510: 1509: 1492: 1418: 1409: 1394: 1375: 1366: 1351: 1345: 1328: 1319: 1274: 1265: 1239:Courtesy pings: 1238: 1231: 1222: 1204:, and following 1199: 1193: 1161: 970: 871: 857: 657: 656: 654: 652: 638: 632: 631: 620: 614: 610: 608: 600: 588: 582: 581: 579: 577: 562: 485:white separatism 189: 81: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 3884: 3883: 3879: 3878: 3877: 3875: 3874: 3873: 3862: 3854: 3831: 3828: 3825: 3822: 3775:Koopabeach12345 3753: 3729: 3716: 3707: 3668: 3664: 3649: 3643: 3623: 3608: 3605: 3602: 3601: 3596:reliable source 3587: 3573:176.237.131.247 3558: 3554: 3539: 3533: 3476: 3447: 3443: 3428: 3422: 3399: 3396: 3386: 3356: 3352: 3337: 3331: 3326: 3325: 3324: 3315: 3311: 3244: 3234: 3232: 3181: 3177: 3162: 3156: 2963: 2960: 2957: 2954: 2884: 2879: 2878: 2877: 2870: 2866: 2839: 2812: 2743:false precision 2715: 2690: 2600: 2243: 2169:primary sources 2165:white supremacy 2132:tertiary source 1974: 1857: 1852: 1840: 1839: 1723:Michael H. Hart 1656: 1654: 1636: 1634: 1632:Washington Post 1625: 1601: 1520: 1505: 1501: 1490: 1481: 1454: 1427: 1405: 1389: 1362: 1349: 1343: 1315: 1261: 1218: 1197: 1191: 1176: 1151: 1128: 968: 935: 882: 865: 851: 802:false precision 662: 661: 660: 650: 648: 640: 639: 635: 621: 611: 601: 590: 589: 585: 575: 573: 564: 563: 559: 543: 522: 501: 481:white supremacy 469: 183: 90: 77: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 3882: 3880: 3853: 3850: 3849: 3848: 3847: 3846: 3845: 3844: 3843: 3842: 3817: 3804:78.111.193.171 3771: 3752: 3749: 3728: 3725: 3724: 3723: 3717:casualdejekyll 3677: 3676: 3653: 3642: 3639: 3622: 3619: 3618: 3617: 3567: 3566: 3543: 3532: 3529: 3528: 3527: 3526: 3525: 3510: 3456: 3455: 3432: 3421: 3418: 3417: 3416: 3365: 3364: 3341: 3330: 3327: 3323: 3322: 3308: 3307: 3303: 3302: 3301: 3285: 3284: 3264: 3263: 3190: 3189: 3166: 3155: 3152: 3151: 3150: 3149: 3148: 3147: 3146: 3145: 3144: 3143: 3142: 3141: 3140: 3139: 3138: 3137: 3136: 3135: 3134: 2974: 2925: 2924: 2923: 2922: 2883: 2880: 2876: 2875: 2863: 2862: 2858: 2838: 2835: 2811: 2808: 2807: 2806: 2805: 2804: 2803: 2802: 2784: 2762: 2761: 2714: 2711: 2689: 2686: 2685: 2684: 2683: 2682: 2681: 2680: 2643: 2599: 2596: 2595: 2594: 2593: 2592: 2591: 2590: 2589: 2588: 2587: 2586: 2562: 2557:article says, 2555:New York Times 2551: 2539: 2529: 2528: 2527: 2526: 2525: 2524: 2509: 2505: 2501: 2474: 2466: 2463: 2462: 2461: 2446: 2433: 2432: 2399: 2397: 2396: 2395: 2394: 2368: 2357: 2356: 2341:Likewise, the 2339: 2338: 2337: 2330: 2316: 2307:New York Times 2298: 2296: 2295: 2293: 2271: 2270: 2242: 2239: 2238: 2237: 2236: 2235: 2191: 2190: 2189: 2188: 2187: 2186: 2185: 2184: 2183: 2160: 2151: 2143: 2128: 2085: 2084: 2083: 2082: 2064: 2063: 2062: 2043: 2042: 2041: 2040: 2011: 1973: 1970: 1969: 1968: 1929: 1928: 1927: 1926: 1925: 1924: 1923: 1922: 1921: 1920: 1919: 1918: 1917: 1916: 1906:208.84.155.212 1876:208.84.155.212 1850: 1837: 1821: 1820: 1819: 1818: 1817: 1816: 1815: 1814: 1813: 1812: 1796:208.84.155.212 1788: 1787: 1786: 1765:208.84.155.212 1759: 1758: 1757: 1726: 1717:It later says 1711: 1696:208.84.155.212 1681: 1680: 1679: 1678: 1665: 1664: 1663: 1643: 1612: 1611: 1573: 1519: 1516: 1515: 1514: 1480: 1477: 1453: 1450: 1426: 1423: 1388: 1385: 1384: 1383: 1382: 1381: 1380: 1379: 1279: 1245:AManWithNoPlan 1175: 1172: 1150: 1147: 1136:217.104.57.120 1127: 1124: 1100: 1099: 1098: 1097: 1080: 1079: 1078: 1077: 1076: 1075: 1074: 1073: 1051: 1050: 1049: 1048: 1047: 1046: 1035:82.181.160.138 1020: 1019: 1018: 1017: 1016: 1015: 1007: 1006: 1005: 1004: 993:82.181.160.138 979: 978: 934: 931: 930: 929: 928: 927: 893: 887: 886: 878: 863: 848: 847: 846: 845: 746: 745: 744: 743: 742: 741: 740: 739: 738: 737: 736: 735: 659: 658: 633: 583: 556: 555: 551: 550: 549: 548: 547: 539: 527: 526: 518: 497: 468: 465: 464: 463: 462: 461: 460: 459: 458: 457: 456: 455: 454: 453: 452: 451: 450: 449: 448: 447: 446: 445: 444: 443: 442: 441: 440: 439: 438: 437: 89: 86: 83: 82: 75: 70: 65: 62: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3881: 3872: 3871: 3868: 3867: 3865: 3858: 3851: 3841: 3838: 3835: 3834: 3818: 3815: 3814: 3813: 3809: 3805: 3801: 3800: 3799: 3795: 3791: 3786: 3785: 3784: 3780: 3776: 3772: 3769: 3768: 3767: 3766: 3762: 3758: 3757:172.119.160.3 3750: 3748: 3747: 3743: 3739: 3734: 3726: 3722: 3719: 3713: 3705: 3704: 3703: 3702: 3698: 3694: 3689: 3688: 3683: 3674: 3671:parameter to 3662: 3658: 3654: 3647: 3646: 3640: 3638: 3637: 3633: 3629: 3620: 3616: 3613: 3597: 3593: 3585: 3584: 3583: 3582: 3578: 3574: 3564: 3561:parameter to 3552: 3548: 3544: 3537: 3536: 3530: 3524: 3520: 3516: 3511: 3507: 3506: 3505: 3501: 3497: 3493: 3489: 3486:redirects to 3485: 3482: 3474: 3473: 3472: 3471: 3467: 3463: 3453: 3450:parameter to 3441: 3437: 3433: 3426: 3425: 3419: 3415: 3411: 3407: 3403: 3402: 3392: 3384: 3383: 3382: 3381: 3377: 3373: 3362: 3359:parameter to 3350: 3346: 3342: 3335: 3334: 3328: 3319: 3313: 3310: 3306: 3300: 3296: 3292: 3287: 3286: 3282: 3278: 3274: 3270: 3266: 3265: 3262: 3257: 3252: 3251: 3250: 3240: 3231: 3230: 3229: 3228: 3224: 3220: 3214: 3213: 3208: 3207: 3202: 3201: 3197: 3187: 3184:parameter to 3175: 3171: 3167: 3160: 3159: 3153: 3133: 3128: 3123: 3120: 3116: 3112: 3107: 3103: 3099: 3098: 3097: 3093: 3089: 3085: 3081: 3080: 3075: 3071: 3070: 3069: 3064: 3059: 3056: 3052: 3048: 3044: 3043: 3041: 3037: 3033: 3029: 3022: 3021: 3019: 3015: 3011: 3007: 3001: 3000: 2999: 2995: 2991: 2987: 2983: 2979: 2975: 2973: 2970: 2967: 2966: 2950: 2946: 2945: 2944: 2940: 2936: 2931: 2930: 2929: 2928: 2927: 2926: 2921: 2917: 2913: 2909: 2908: 2907: 2906: 2905: 2903: 2899: 2895: 2891: 2881: 2873: 2868: 2865: 2861: 2857: 2856: 2852: 2848: 2843: 2836: 2834: 2832: 2828: 2824: 2823:36.230.69.175 2820: 2809: 2801: 2797: 2793: 2789: 2785: 2781: 2780: 2779: 2775: 2771: 2766: 2765: 2764: 2763: 2760: 2756: 2752: 2748: 2744: 2740: 2736: 2735: 2734: 2733: 2729: 2725: 2721: 2712: 2710: 2709: 2705: 2701: 2700:Beyond My Ken 2698: 2695: 2687: 2679: 2675: 2671: 2670:Beyond My Ken 2666: 2665: 2664: 2660: 2656: 2652: 2648: 2640: 2639: 2638: 2634: 2630: 2629:Beyond My Ken 2626: 2621: 2620: 2619: 2618: 2614: 2610: 2597: 2585: 2581: 2577: 2572: 2571: 2570: 2567: 2563: 2560: 2556: 2552: 2548: 2544: 2540: 2537: 2536: 2535: 2534: 2533: 2532: 2531: 2530: 2523: 2519: 2515: 2510: 2506: 2502: 2498: 2494: 2493: 2485: 2484: 2483: 2480: 2475: 2472: 2467: 2464: 2459: 2455: 2451: 2447: 2444: 2440: 2439: 2437: 2436: 2435: 2434: 2431: 2427: 2423: 2418: 2413: 2412: 2411: 2410: 2407: 2403: 2393: 2389: 2385: 2381: 2377: 2373: 2369: 2365: 2361: 2360: 2359: 2358: 2355: 2352: 2348: 2344: 2340: 2335: 2331: 2328: 2324: 2322: 2317: 2314: 2310: 2308: 2303: 2302: 2301: 2300: 2299: 2291: 2287: 2286: 2285: 2284: 2280: 2276: 2267: 2266: 2265: 2264: 2260: 2256: 2250: 2248: 2240: 2234: 2230: 2226: 2225:Beyond My Ken 2222: 2218: 2214: 2213: 2211: 2207: 2203: 2199: 2192: 2182: 2178: 2174: 2170: 2166: 2161: 2157: 2152: 2149: 2144: 2141: 2137: 2133: 2129: 2125: 2124: 2123: 2119: 2115: 2110: 2109: 2108: 2104: 2100: 2096: 2091: 2090: 2089: 2088: 2087: 2086: 2081: 2077: 2073: 2069: 2065: 2061: 2057: 2053: 2049: 2048: 2047: 2046: 2045: 2044: 2039: 2035: 2031: 2026: 2025: 2024: 2020: 2016: 2012: 2009: 2005: 2004: 2003: 2002: 1998: 1994: 1990: 1987: 1982: 1981: 1977: 1971: 1967: 1963: 1959: 1955: 1954: 1953: 1951: 1947: 1943: 1939: 1934: 1915: 1911: 1907: 1902: 1901: 1900: 1896: 1892: 1887: 1886: 1885: 1881: 1877: 1873: 1868: 1867: 1866: 1865: 1864: 1863: 1862: 1861: 1860: 1859: 1853: 1851:9780804783316 1848: 1844: 1836: 1832: 1828: 1827: 1809: 1808: 1807: 1806: 1805: 1801: 1797: 1793: 1789: 1785: 1782: 1781: 1780: 1776: 1775: 1774: 1770: 1766: 1763: 1760: 1756: 1753: 1752: 1750: 1746: 1741: 1740: 1739: 1735: 1731: 1727: 1724: 1720: 1716: 1712: 1709: 1708: 1707: 1705: 1701: 1697: 1693: 1686: 1677: 1673: 1669: 1666: 1653: 1649: 1644: 1633: 1629: 1624: 1623: 1621: 1616: 1615: 1614: 1613: 1610: 1607: 1604: 1598: 1595: 1594: 1593: 1591: 1587: 1583: 1579: 1571: 1570: 1567: 1564: 1561: 1558: 1555: 1551: 1550: 1548: 1544: 1540: 1536: 1528: 1527: 1523: 1517: 1513: 1508: 1504: 1499: 1498: 1497: 1496: 1493: 1487: 1478: 1476: 1474: 1470: 1466: 1465:170.99.97.206 1462: 1451: 1449: 1447: 1443: 1439: 1438:170.99.97.206 1435: 1424: 1422: 1421: 1416: 1415: 1410: 1408: 1402: 1401: 1386: 1378: 1373: 1372: 1367: 1365: 1359: 1358: 1348: 1341: 1337: 1333: 1332: 1331: 1326: 1325: 1320: 1318: 1312: 1311: 1304: 1300: 1299: 1298: 1294: 1290: 1289:Beyond My Ken 1286: 1285: 1280: 1277: 1272: 1271: 1266: 1264: 1258: 1257: 1250: 1246: 1242: 1241:Beyond My Ken 1237: 1236: 1235: 1234: 1229: 1228: 1223: 1221: 1215: 1214: 1207: 1203: 1196: 1189: 1185: 1181: 1173: 1171: 1170: 1165: 1160: 1156: 1148: 1146: 1145: 1141: 1137: 1131: 1125: 1123: 1120: 1116: 1112: 1108: 1096: 1092: 1088: 1084: 1083: 1082: 1081: 1072: 1068: 1064: 1063:Beyond My Ken 1059: 1058: 1057: 1056: 1055: 1054: 1053: 1052: 1044: 1040: 1036: 1032: 1026: 1025: 1024: 1023: 1022: 1021: 1013: 1012: 1011: 1010: 1009: 1008: 1002: 998: 994: 990: 983: 982: 981: 980: 977: 974: 971: 965: 964: 963: 962: 958: 954: 950: 945: 943: 938: 932: 926: 922: 918: 914: 911: 909: 907: 905: 902: 900: 898: 894: 891: 890: 889: 888: 885: 881: 877: 876: 869: 868:Beyond My Ken 864: 861: 855: 850: 849: 844: 840: 836: 835:Beyond My Ken 832: 831: 830: 826: 822: 818: 817: 816: 815: 811: 807: 803: 798: 794: 788: 784: 781: 777: 773: 768: 766: 761: 757: 753: 750: 734: 730: 726: 725:Beyond My Ken 722: 721: 720: 716: 712: 708: 707: 706: 702: 698: 697:Beyond My Ken 694: 693: 692: 688: 684: 683:Beyond My Ken 679: 677: 672: 668: 667: 666: 665: 664: 663: 647: 643: 637: 634: 629: 625: 618: 606: 598: 594: 587: 584: 572: 568: 561: 558: 554: 546: 542: 538: 537: 531: 530: 529: 528: 525: 521: 517: 516: 511: 507: 506: 505: 504: 500: 496: 495: 489: 488: 486: 482: 476: 474: 436: 432: 428: 427:Beyond My Ken 425: 422: 421: 416: 415: 414: 410: 406: 402: 398: 394: 390: 389: 388: 384: 380: 379:Beyond My Ken 375: 371: 370: 369: 365: 361: 357: 356: 355: 351: 347: 346:Beyond My Ken 342: 341: 340: 336: 332: 328: 327: 326: 322: 318: 317:Beyond My Ken 314: 313: 308: 304: 303: 298: 297: 292: 291: 286: 285: 284: 280: 276: 272: 271: 270: 266: 262: 261:Beyond My Ken 258: 257: 251: 250: 249: 245: 241: 237: 233: 232: 231: 227: 223: 222:Beyond My Ken 219: 218: 212: 211: 206: 205: 204: 200: 196: 195:Beyond My Ken 192: 187: 181: 180: 179: 175: 171: 166: 165: 164: 160: 156: 155:Beyond My Ken 152: 151: 146: 145: 140: 139: 134: 133: 127: 126: 125: 124: 120: 116: 112: 106: 105: 101: 98: 97: 93: 87: 80: 76: 74: 71: 69: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 3860: 3859: 3855: 3821: 3754: 3730: 3711: 3693:86.57.58.244 3690: 3684: 3680: 3672: 3657:edit request 3624: 3591: 3570: 3562: 3547:edit request 3480: 3459: 3451: 3436:edit request 3395: 3390: 3368: 3360: 3345:edit request 3317: 3312: 3304: 3248: 3247: 3238: 3215: 3209: 3203: 3193: 3185: 3170:edit request 3127:Boracay Bill 3126: 3110: 3101: 3088:Newimpartial 3078: 3077: 3063:Boracay Bill 3062: 3046: 3026:— Preceding 3004:— Preceding 2990:Newimpartial 2981: 2953: 2912:Newimpartial 2888:— Preceding 2885: 2867: 2859: 2844: 2840: 2817:— Preceding 2813: 2716: 2691: 2646: 2625:WP:Recentism 2601: 2558: 2554: 2546: 2542: 2491: 2470: 2457: 2453: 2449: 2442: 2398: 2346: 2326: 2320: 2312: 2306: 2297: 2272: 2251: 2244: 2196:— Preceding 2155: 2147: 2114:Tym Whittier 2072:Tym Whittier 2067: 2030:Tym Whittier 1993:Tym Whittier 1988: 1983: 1979: 1978: 1975: 1936:— Preceding 1930: 1871: 1870:because the 1842: 1833: 1829: 1826: 1823: 1783: 1777:Also, here: 1754: 1748: 1690:— Preceding 1684: 1682: 1655:. Retrieved 1651: 1635:. Retrieved 1631: 1576:— Preceding 1572: 1552: 1533:— Preceding 1531: 1529: 1525: 1524: 1521: 1482: 1459:— Preceding 1455: 1432:— Preceding 1428: 1413: 1406: 1399: 1390: 1370: 1363: 1356: 1347:cite journal 1339: 1323: 1316: 1309: 1283: 1282: 1269: 1262: 1255: 1226: 1219: 1212: 1195:cite journal 1177: 1152: 1132: 1129: 1111:Sheik Way-El 1105:— Preceding 1101: 1029:— Preceding 987:— Preceding 948: 946: 941: 939: 936: 874: 859: 796: 792: 789: 785: 769: 764: 762: 758: 754: 751: 747: 649:. Retrieved 645: 636: 596: 586: 574:. Retrieved 570: 560: 552: 535: 514: 493: 490: 477: 470: 419: 418: 400: 396: 392: 311: 310: 301: 300: 295: 294: 289: 288: 255: 254: 235: 216: 215: 209: 208: 149: 148: 143: 142: 138:supremacists 137: 136: 131: 130: 110: 107: 102: 99: 94: 91: 78: 43: 37: 3790:Chardowdude 3496:Egsan Bacon 3372:67.61.132.4 3318:Hate Crimes 3249:Ganbaruby! 3079:in response 2947:Please see 2847:Jonathan f1 2739:nationalist 1602:Doug Weller 1582:73.76.220.8 1539:73.76.220.8 1491:PCHS-NJROTC 1287:consensus? 969:Doug Weller 953:Wikkileaker 821:FenceSitter 711:FenceSitter 651:22 February 576:22 February 508:I went all 473:FenceSitter 405:FenceSitter 360:FenceSitter 331:FenceSitter 275:FenceSitter 240:FenceSitter 170:FenceSitter 150:nationalist 144:separatists 115:FenceSitter 36:This is an 3727:Dixiecrats 3665:|answered= 3628:Nucle4r135 3555:|answered= 3444:|answered= 3353:|answered= 3305:References 3178:|answered= 3119:Wtmitchell 3055:Wtmitchell 2860:References 2694:User:Pudeo 2655:MattMauler 2609:MattMauler 2438:Grayfell, 2400:Regarding 2376:WP:PRIMARY 2343:FBI report 2245:Regarding 1622:just now: 1149:Steve King 776:documented 553:References 3733:Dixiecrat 3712:Not done: 3592:Not done: 3515:Lolligag9 3509:society." 3481:Not done: 3462:Lolligag9 3125:(earlier 3061:(earlier 2770:Cherio222 2724:Cherio222 2598:Recentism 2454:identical 2443:identical 2417:WP:WEASEL 2402:this edit 2247:this edit 2241:FBI quote 2217:WP:FRINGE 2136:WP:FRINGE 2095:WP:WEASEL 1986:wp:weasel 1657:March 28, 1637:March 28, 875:byteflush 793:Hatewatch 780:discussed 772:alt-right 605:cite news 536:byteflush 515:byteflush 494:byteflush 423:account? 79:Archive 5 73:Archive 4 68:Archive 3 60:Archive 1 3863:Jmjosh90 3410:contribs 3291:Grayfell 3111:eugenics 3102:eugenics 3047:eugenics 3028:unsigned 3006:unsigned 2986:Eugenics 2890:unsigned 2819:unsigned 2792:Grayfell 2751:Grayfell 2651:WP:UNDUE 2576:Grayfell 2514:Grayfell 2500:support. 2422:Grayfell 2384:Grayfell 2275:JRizzled 2255:Grayfell 2198:unsigned 2173:Grayfell 2156:reliable 2099:Grayfell 2052:Grayfell 2015:Grayfell 1958:Grayfell 1938:unsigned 1891:Grayfell 1730:Grayfell 1692:unsigned 1668:Grayfell 1620:Facebook 1578:unsigned 1535:unsigned 1461:unsigned 1434:unsigned 1407:Josve05a 1364:Josve05a 1317:Josve05a 1263:Josve05a 1249:Headbomb 1220:Josve05a 1119:contribs 1107:unsigned 1031:unsigned 989:unsigned 917:Grayfell 854:Grayfell 806:Grayfell 186:Grayfell 3492:WP:BLUE 3256:Say hi! 2566:Asarlaí 2553:As the 2479:Asarlaí 2406:Asarlaí 2367:reader. 2351:Asarlaí 2323:article 2309:article 671:WP:BOLD 613:|last1= 510:WP:BOLD 374:WP:CPOV 129:nation 39:archive 3837:(talk) 3122:(talk) 3058:(talk) 2969:(talk) 2380:WP:DUE 2325:says: 2311:says: 1835:globe. 1303:WP:BRD 1284:actual 1206:WP:BRD 949:belief 765:should 296:source 132:inside 109:it be 3669:|ans= 3655:This 3559:|ans= 3545:This 3448:|ans= 3434:This 3357:|ans= 3343:This 3182:|ans= 3168:This 2747:WP:OR 2547:*are* 2458:don't 2450:don't 2148:about 2130:As a 1956:Yup. 1503:Leviv 1393:|doi= 1164:bleep 397:To me 312:again 16:< 3808:talk 3794:talk 3779:talk 3761:talk 3742:talk 3697:talk 3632:talk 3577:talk 3519:talk 3500:talk 3466:talk 3406:talk 3400:food 3397:Eric 3376:talk 3295:talk 3239:Done 3223:talk 3206:race 3200:race 3196:race 3092:talk 3036:talk 3014:talk 2994:talk 2988:... 2939:talk 2916:talk 2898:talk 2851:talk 2827:talk 2796:talk 2774:talk 2755:talk 2728:talk 2704:talk 2697:here 2674:talk 2659:talk 2647:rest 2633:talk 2613:talk 2580:talk 2518:talk 2426:talk 2388:talk 2372:FOIA 2318:The 2304:The 2279:talk 2259:talk 2229:talk 2206:talk 2177:talk 2127:why. 2118:talk 2103:talk 2076:talk 2056:talk 2034:talk 2019:talk 2006:See 1997:talk 1962:talk 1946:talk 1910:talk 1895:talk 1880:talk 1872:term 1847:ISBN 1800:talk 1769:talk 1734:talk 1700:talk 1672:talk 1659:2019 1639:2019 1606:talk 1586:talk 1543:talk 1469:talk 1442:talk 1293:talk 1140:talk 1115:talk 1091:talk 1067:talk 1039:talk 997:talk 973:talk 957:talk 921:talk 880:Talk 860:feel 839:talk 825:talk 810:talk 778:and 729:talk 715:talk 701:talk 687:talk 653:2018 628:link 624:link 617:help 578:2018 541:Talk 520:Talk 499:Talk 431:talk 420:real 409:talk 401:your 383:talk 364:talk 350:talk 335:talk 321:talk 279:talk 265:talk 244:talk 226:talk 217:were 199:talk 191:here 174:talk 159:talk 119:talk 111:some 3832:Fir 3829:een 3826:rgr 3823:Eve 3685:By 3667:or 3659:to 3603:Mel 3557:or 3549:to 3446:or 3438:to 3355:or 3347:to 3180:or 3172:to 3082:to 2964:Fir 2961:een 2958:rgr 2955:Eve 2471:all 1652:CNN 1507:ich 1340:one 795:or 597:CNN 302:are 287:As 210:all 3810:) 3796:) 3781:) 3763:) 3744:) 3738:DN 3699:) 3673:no 3634:) 3609:nn 3606:ma 3579:) 3563:no 3521:) 3502:) 3468:) 3452:no 3412:) 3408:| 3378:) 3361:no 3297:) 3225:) 3186:no 3094:) 3038:) 3016:) 2996:) 2941:) 2918:) 2900:) 2853:) 2829:) 2798:) 2776:) 2757:) 2730:) 2706:) 2676:) 2661:) 2635:) 2615:) 2604:12 2582:) 2520:) 2428:) 2390:) 2281:) 2273:-- 2261:) 2249:: 2231:) 2223:. 2208:) 2179:) 2120:) 2105:) 2078:) 2068:of 2058:) 2036:) 2021:) 1999:) 1964:) 1948:) 1912:) 1897:) 1882:) 1838:— 1802:) 1794:. 1771:) 1736:) 1702:) 1674:) 1650:. 1630:. 1588:) 1545:) 1471:) 1444:) 1403:) 1360:) 1352:. 1350:}} 1344:{{ 1313:) 1295:) 1259:) 1251:. 1247:, 1243:, 1216:) 1198:}} 1192:{{ 1159:R2 1157:. 1142:) 1121:) 1117:• 1093:) 1069:) 1041:) 999:) 959:) 923:) 841:) 827:) 812:) 731:) 717:) 703:) 689:) 644:. 609:: 607:}} 603:{{ 595:. 569:. 433:) 411:) 385:) 366:) 352:) 337:) 323:) 281:) 267:) 256:is 246:) 228:) 201:) 176:) 161:) 121:) 64:← 3806:( 3792:( 3777:( 3759:( 3740:( 3695:( 3630:( 3575:( 3517:( 3498:( 3464:( 3404:( 3374:( 3293:( 3258:) 3254:( 3245:◢ 3221:( 3129:) 3090:( 3065:) 3034:( 3012:( 2992:( 2937:( 2914:( 2896:( 2849:( 2825:( 2794:( 2772:( 2753:( 2726:( 2702:( 2672:( 2657:( 2631:( 2611:( 2578:( 2516:( 2487:' 2477:~ 2424:( 2386:( 2329:. 2315:. 2277:( 2257:( 2227:( 2204:( 2175:( 2116:( 2101:( 2074:( 2070:. 2054:( 2032:( 2017:( 1995:( 1960:( 1944:( 1908:( 1893:( 1878:( 1854:. 1798:( 1767:( 1732:( 1698:( 1670:( 1661:. 1641:. 1584:( 1541:( 1467:( 1440:( 1417:) 1414:c 1411:( 1400:t 1397:( 1374:) 1371:c 1368:( 1357:t 1354:( 1327:) 1324:c 1321:( 1310:t 1307:( 1291:( 1273:) 1270:c 1267:( 1256:t 1253:( 1230:) 1227:c 1224:( 1213:t 1210:( 1166:) 1162:( 1138:( 1113:( 1089:( 1065:( 1037:( 995:( 955:( 919:( 870:: 866:@ 856:: 852:@ 837:( 823:( 808:( 727:( 713:( 699:( 685:( 655:. 630:) 619:) 599:. 580:. 429:( 407:( 393:I 381:( 362:( 348:( 333:( 319:( 290:I 277:( 263:( 242:( 224:( 197:( 188:: 184:@ 172:( 157:( 117:( 50:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index