- The American Conservative - http://www.theamericanconservative.com -

White Nationalism In Christian High School

A reader who goes to a conservative Christian high school, and who says he is a white, male conservative Christian, writes:

As someone who’s seeing the rise of Milo’s ideals specifically in teenagers raised in a conservative context in my Christian high school, I feel like I have a perspective that you don’t.

Milo isn’t getting conservative ideas out there in a subversive label that’s appealing to Millenials. He’s a prophet of the deeply un-conservative alt-right. He’s not creating a climate that’s accepting of conservative ideals. He’s creating one that specifically rejects those values as hallmarks of a system that they view as a failure through not being radical enough.

That’s why all the good little Christians at my high school are falling in behind him — not because they actually give a crap about conservatism but because he’s giving angry, aimless young men whose church hasn’t given them anything solid to fall back on an alternate source of values that happens to be steeped in fascist and white supremacist ideals. It’s just as absorbed in identity politics as any social-justice movement on the left is, except focused on white men and not LGBT people.

It has swallowed up most of the guys in the senior class at my school, and I’m tired of it. You can’t just not talk about politics with them, because everything is politics to them. Every discussion devolves into things like which girls are “feminazis,” celebrities dating outside their ethnicity being “white genocide,” and so on. It’s suffocating to feel like if you say “actually, that’s really racist” you’re going to be brushed off as some liberal or a cuckservative. I’m genuinely scared that it’s going to spread to the point where I won’t have anyone I can talk to like a normal human being. This isn’t hyperbole.

I’ve sat and heard multiple conversations in the school hallway about things like how the very concept of legal immigration is “cultural Marxism” and about how if all the blacks in America moved back to Africa there’d be less crime, and Africa would be better off because they would have people who had learned things in America. It’s absolutely nuts, but what am I going to do? I don’t know that any adults would take me seriously if I told them this was a problem. The alt-right has defensive talking points are baked right into the ideology so as to make it more palatable for conservatives, just like how communism masqueraded as concern for the workers in the early days to make it appealing to moderate socialists.

Maybe that’s just the norm for kids my age now, and I’m going to just have to be paranoid that everyone that I meet is secretly a white nationalist.

Wow. I’m going to have to think about this one. I verified this reader’s identity. High school readers of this blog, and college student readers, what are you seeing and hearing in your schools?

UPDATE: Another reader writes:

I cannot comment so much about what is going in high schools these days, but I can tell you that it is downright eerie how stale my college’s chapter of College Republicans is. There is no acknowledgement of the changing and changed situation in America or the world, just reflexive support for tax cuts and poking Russia in the eye. Some of them can quote Hayek at you for hours, but it is a shallow allegiance to conservatism, devoid of real life and creative growth. In a word: stagnant. Like a tree without deep roots, all it will take is a mighty wind to knock them from the comfortable perches held by their fathers before them.

I can believe that. When I was in college in the 1980s, the College Republicans at my school were huge. I can’t see, though, why any intellectually serious conservative college student today would want to give himself or herself over to working in the Republican Party (or anything related to movement conservatism, frankly).

231 Comments (Open | Close)

231 Comments To "White Nationalism In Christian High School"

#1 Comment By mrscracker On February 23, 2017 @ 9:46 am

Patrick,
Our birthrates the lowest since the Great Depression. It’s not limited to white folks.
I kinda doubt the environment plays a large part in that, too.

#2 Comment By Hector_St_Clare On February 23, 2017 @ 11:39 am

No, that would be terminally dumb, and you’d be rightly decried as a racist for asserting that “there is no Indian culture” or “there is no African culture” or “there is no Chinese culture,” with the same derisive attitude that you just claimed “there is no white/European culture.”

Chinese culture exists, because over 90% of people in “China” belong to one ethnic group. I don’t think Indian culture really exists in the same sense, and “African” culture *certainly* doesn’t. Africa contains more genetic diversity, as well as more linguistic division, than the rest of the world put together.

Don’t tell me your against high white birth rates because of the dang environment.

I’m against high birth rates for all groups because the environment. There’s no reason we have to live in a world of 8 billion people, and we’d probably be better off with half or a quarter of that number. I’d rather focus on encouraging Africans, northern Indians and the Muslim world (the only portions of the world which still have high fertility) to have lower fertility than encourage other groups to have high ones.

I don’t understand the thought process that a smaller global population is inherently a bad thing. Aside from anything else, it’s unconservative. The good old days of Dante and Shakespeare had a lot fewer people, worldwide, than we have today.

#3 Comment By Hector_St_Clare On February 23, 2017 @ 11:57 am

Jones,

We had a thoughtful debate on this issue a couple weeks ago and I’d re-iterate the same points I made then. I think we actually came to some productive agreement that time. We both agreed there is space in the world for cosmopolitan polities (you called them “empires”) as well as for ethnic homelands. And we both agreed, I think, that America fits more into the cosmopolitan empire mold than into the tribal homeland mold.

I will say, though, that I don’t think your program on “limited immigration, skill-based, some small amount of humanitarian immigration, civic nationalism, assimilation, the Teddy Roosevelt creed” makes all that much sense in principle. In practice of course it does make sense, as a sort of compromise between the desires of ethnic nationalists and open borders enthusiasts. The thing is this though. You refer, correctly, to ethnic nationalism and open borders as “extreme” ideologies. I’m not the first though to notice that extreme ideologies are often logically and morally consistent in a way that more moderate ideologies aren’t.

Let’s take skill-based immigration for one thing. The open borders argument is based on the idea that it’s morally unfair to force people to remain in the country of their birth, based on arbitrary accident of birth. I don’t agree with this as a general principle, but I certainly don’t think you personally should be required to live the rest your life in Pakistan, any more than I would want to live in India. The thing is though, the skill based immigration regime you support is just as morally arbitrary as a racially based immigration regime. You’re a smart guy: your intellectual skills are just as much an accident of birth, or nearly so, as your skin color (and less so than one’s religion). It’s not inherently any more “fair” to say to a peasant from the Pakistan-Afghan borderlands “you can’t immigrate to the US because you don’t have relevant skills” than it is to say “you can’t emigrate because of your skin color or your religion or your beliefs about the role of women.”

Ethnic nationalists of course don’t think immigration should be based on ‘fairness’, they believe in the race / nation as a ‘partly inbred extended family’, like Steve Sailer likes to say, and just like you don’t based decisions about dating or marriage on ‘fairness’, neither would you make decisions about immigration laws. By the same token though, someone like M_Young might be happier to welcome an illiterate blue-eyed Circassian Muslim from Jordan into their country than they would to take, well, me, or you.

I actually have more respect for the open-borders people, precisely because of their intellectual and moral consistency, than I do for a skill based immigration regime. I think most societies are best off as essentially tribe-based, but I also think even they should allow a small level of immigration, and I think it’s also good to have some multicultural societies like the United States as well. It’s not clear to me though why a skill based immigration regime is morally better than either an ethnonationalist or an open borders society though. If we want to be a nation of immigrants than maybe we should be a nation of immigrants, and allow in, well, impoverished Haitians and Syrians who have no better option in preference to smart Indian and Korean engineers who have plenty of better options. Importing the intellectual cream of other societies seems like a sort of social parasitism, that impoverishes other societies at the cost of our own.

Regarding assimilation and “civic” or “creedal” nationalism, I’d love to hear your thoughs on exactly *what* immigrants should be expected to assimilate to, or to profess belief in. Because it seems to me that in a multicultural and liberal- democratic society, holding everyone to allegiance to a specific creed is much more difficult than it would be in a state based explicitly on ideology or religion.

#4 Comment By TNick On February 23, 2017 @ 12:33 pm

In the name of diversity, the left championed Identity Politics, but now that the Alt Right adopted Identity Politics, they’re labeled as Nazi, Nationalists and such. The left set the rules of the game, the Alt-Right will play the game with a vengeance.

#5 Comment By The Autist Formerly Known as “KD” On February 23, 2017 @ 1:13 pm

Jamie writes:

Recall that this is a nation founded by people fleeing their “homes,” a land where a second-generation East Indian with a Louisiana accent can become a governor, and call out a descendant of John Winthrop for a perceived lack of patriotism.

No, America was founded by Protestants who wanted to worship God and preserve their unique form of life from interference by the Government. And the fact that Bobby Jindral says something stupid is as apropos of America’s true identity as a Trump tweet.

Americans are ideologues, it is part of their modernist, rationalist make-up.

To return to our home, we must go back, back to primal actuality, before reification and schemes for improvement, back before modernism.

For those of us from Europe, we must return to those primal European forms. For those of us not from Europe, they must return to the well springs of their own cultures.

Jamie writes:

“Blood and Soil” is an old and terrible fraud, I should hope in America it would be unwelcome. This is not some traditional or customary idea here, it’s an attempt to counterfeit a European-style ethnicity out of the 300 years of religious separatism, slave importation, Manifest Destiny, Indian Wars, exclusion acts, refugees and all the other bits and bobs that decided where everyone ended up. This is a deeply ideological enterprise, it is the furthest thing from reality.

You use the phrase blood and soil, not I. But if you note, neither blood nor soil is an idea, they are physical actualities.

One is not fighting to purify the race, or end hierarchy and inequality, or bring about the final liberation of mankind or any other typical modernist ideological project.

Blood and soil is not so alien to American history, it is simply alien to our alien elite. Well, too bad, we decided to go back to being European or African or wherever we are from. We no longer want to be part of you, and you no longer speak for us.

Take your dying fertility rates, your enlightened values, your egalitarianism with you. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

#6 Comment By l’autre J On February 23, 2017 @ 2:03 pm

That presumes that people who believe that Europe is in danger don’t come to power and attempt a solution of the Muslim problem…

And in so doing, morally forfeit their claim entirely.

Not one word of evidence for the idea that Milo is white supremacist or alt-right, hell that he’s even racist. If anecdotes about some people who follow him are all the evidence you have against him, he’s right. It’s that simple.

[1]

“It turns out that some words do hurt. You may have noticed that, in this piece, I have not explicitly described Yiannopoulos or the movement that has made him famous as white supremacist, Neo-Nazi, fascist, or racist. The main reason for that is that it has been made explicitly clear to me that, were I to write such a thing, a libel suit the size of Mar-A-Lago would drop on me, and Yiannopoulos would use every trick in his surprisingly defensive playbook to prize out an apology, because that’s what friends are for. He’s done it to other reporters. He’s not the only one. In fact, a defining feature of the new-right populists is their ability to build a reputation as rhino-hided truth-sayers while flailing their hands in panic if anyone uses whatever words happen to hit them where it hurts. So, for legal reasons, I must state that Milo Yiannopolous, possibly alone of all the smug white people in the world, is not a racist. For moral reasons, however, I must state that Yiannopoulos’ personal beliefs are irrelevant given that he’s built a career off peddling bigotry in public. What about sexism? “Sexism I don’t have the energy to wrestle with you over,” says Yiannopoulos, who, I can personally confirm, is the maple-cured bacon of misogynist piggery — oily and sweet and crass and, on a gut level, dreadful for your health.

“It seems perfunctory to point out the hypocrisy of building a movement and a career on the back of insulting people — Muslims, migrants, women, people of color — while nursing a hair-trigger sensitivity to any personal attack you haven’t pre-approved. That hypocrisy, though, does not appear self-evident to anyone within this movement, because a fundamental tenet of far-right pro-trolling is that it’s only other people’s feelings that are frivolous. Their own feelings, by contrast, including the capacity to feel shame when they’re held accountable for their actions, are so momentous that infringing them is tantamount to censure, practically fascism in and of itself. These are men, in short, who have founded an entire movement on the basis of refusing to handle their emotions like adults.”

#7 Comment By The Autist Formerly Known as “KD” On February 23, 2017 @ 3:35 pm

Jamie writes:

Conservatism is rooted in the discovery that Being is fundamentally good.

I suppose even with his neck in a noose, Dr. Pangloss found solace in the idea that only the Best of all Possible Worlds could produce a rope.

You are being anachronistic. Dr. Pangloss is Voltaire’s reply to Liebnitz. I didn’t claim that we live in the best of all possible worlds (although fine tuning arguments might be making a similar claim).

“Esse que esse, bonum est” is St. Augustine, who wrote extensively on coming home to himself. Being, in itself, is good.

Not that the particular concatenation of objects were are currently experiencing is good, or the best possible.

Yet, if the world sucks as bad as you believe it to be, why do you have any confidence you can improve it?

If you are religious, maybe you can return to some pre-Fallen condition, but if you are not, then why wouldn’t the world just continue in the Fallen state, mostly you are just squeezing the air around in the balloon, rather than inflating it.

I personally find belief in God easier to wrap my head around then the idea that human societies are converging on some utopian or quasi-utopian future.

#8 Comment By chas On February 23, 2017 @ 3:38 pm

As I read more about this Milo character, and listen to his responses to interview questions, I think his impact is far, far more negative than he thinks. And I’m not even beginning to suggest that character has any moral equality with some fine people who have been labeled alt-right.

I hear someone with a cultural view that is, to me, somewhat nihilistic and self-centered. His idea that there is some youthful wing of what he calls the alt-right, that energizes him and motivates his action, suggests to me a possible backdoor agenda where he wants to gain influence and hold sway over that “new” faction.

Why do we see so much coverage of a Brittany Spear when she is very young and puts out her first song? Beyond the idea of making money is the recognition that she will develop a large following. Or take the woman GaGa for example. Same thing. The hope is that They all would help lead the new followers to the world of progressive order. The only person who wouldn’t get recognition would be Jesus Christ.

This Milo may be saying 2+2 = 4, but most everything else I see is wrong from other perspectives. I still don’t believe the high school note writer is correct about those Christian kids, after all he apparently is one, but if he sees that milo in the way I’m indicating, he may be on to something there. I have to take the kid at his word, but he seems to have another agenda himself that is beyond what he purports.

#9 Comment By The Autist Formerly Known as “KD” On February 23, 2017 @ 3:47 pm

This is a beautiful piece by Jaroslav Pelikan on the Christian Intellectual that really hits the nail on the head:

[2]

#10 Comment By The Autist Formerly Known as “KD” On February 23, 2017 @ 3:50 pm

Father, Son, Holy Spirit

Soil, Language, History, the root of our authentic being.

#11 Comment By Liam On February 23, 2017 @ 8:11 pm

“Father, Son, Holy Spirit

Soil, Language, History, the root of our authentic being.”

The first line has nothing to do with the second except to transcend.

People who live in the USA, regardless of their ancestry, live off its soil and its fruits. The soil of their ancestral places elsewhere has already been transformed – there’s no going back to What Was. Ditto Language. Ditto Authenticity – indeed, trying to go back is about the most inauthentic thing there is.

And, for Christians, it’s not a legitimate option. A Christian necessarily is a Homo Viator, on the way to the New Creation, in but not of the old one. Christianity is fundamentally incompatible with blood and soil tribalism – it’s in Christianity’s very nature to be a solvent of such tribalism – though of course many try to square that circle.

#12 Comment By Patrick On February 23, 2017 @ 10:29 pm

@ mrscracker:

If I was unclear, my point was people who are concerned about “white genocide” had better not be fans of contracepting (for white people, at least). That is like fighting with one hand tied behind your back. Deport an illegal immigrant, and the white share of the population increases. Deport an illegal immigrant and have a white baby, and the white share of the population increases by twice as much. These folks had better be cranking out the white babies or they’re a bunch of half-assed racial realists, in my book.

#13 Comment By Patrick On February 23, 2017 @ 10:33 pm

Also, if these people are in favor of white contracepting *for the sake of the dang environment*, then their agenda is something besides making America White Again, and they are being flat our dishonest with just about every post. They are literally prioritizing the environment over having white babies, which, well, they’ve been lying about their agenda for the entire time I’ve been reading this weblog.

#14 Comment By Tim D. On February 23, 2017 @ 11:05 pm

“Intellectuals” stick around for two reasons: (1) they honestly believe their nonsense and (2) people make at least 6-digit figures by toeing to the party line.

Anyway, Milo’s views are fairly common among the Republican primary voters I speak to on an occasional basis. There is a lot of overlap between the alt-right and primary voters. The one about blacks going back to Africa is the comment I hear most often. Some even speak of deportations for blacks, regardless if they were born here or not.

The truth of the matter though is that racism is embedded in movement conservatism’s DNA. Only white Christians who speak English view themselves as “real Americans”. They think everyone else is not. Thus, the “non-Americans” need to either shut up and get with the program or be deported, regardless if they were born and raised here. Oh, and if you happen to be a white Christian who disagrees with said statements? Two things: (1) you’re a traitor to your race and (2) you’ll be deported to Canada, or somewhere.

The alt-right and many Republican primary voters literally think what I just mentioned in the above paragraph.

#15 Comment By erudite On February 24, 2017 @ 1:35 am

[NFR: Drop me an e-mail, please, before I post anything else you’ve written. I need some more information about your identity. — RD]

#16 Comment By EngineerScotty On February 24, 2017 @ 3:33 am

Well, ES, tell us? What is wrong with ‘white supremacy’ that isn’t wrong with yellow supremacy or black supremacy or brown supremacy?

All forms of racist supremacy ideology are destructive nonsense. However, the other flavors of supremacy are nowhere close to political power in the United States. In the Latino world, nationality and linguistic group are generally more important things than what we think of as race. (Yellow supremacy–or specifically Japanese supremacy–was defeated by the US in World War II).

And no, Obama is not a “black supremacist” or anything close to it.

But you’ll not see me defending any sort of supremacy. But I will happily and proudly defend equality, which stands opposed to all forms of supremacy.

#17 Comment By JonF On February 24, 2017 @ 6:07 am

Re: For those of us from Europe, we must return to those primal European forms. For those of us not from Europe, they must return to the well springs of their own cultures.

Oh, good grief, why? Taken literally, Rod and I (and a number of others who post here) would have to forsake the Orthodox Church and return to whatever Church our ancestors favored. That’s a non-starter right there.
Even on the cusp of age 50 I prefer going forward to the future. The past is a prison only if you want it to be– the door is locked from the inside only.

#18 Comment By JonF On February 24, 2017 @ 6:20 am

Re: You make this prediction after citing several historical case studies that do not justify it… I hope your prediction is right. I fear it is wrong.

What world-riving calamity are you expecting that would prove my prediction wrong? And even if such a thing comes to pass, it will necessarily reduce the numbers of non-European peoples by at least similar fractions as well.

#19 Comment By JonF On February 24, 2017 @ 6:31 am

Re: The later immigrants have not intermingled in a similar manner and thus aren’t ethnically American.

You are totally wrong about this, especially in regards to immigrants from Europe. I myself am a mix of British (through my father) and German (through my mother) ancestry, with possibly a dollop of Native American. None of the European peoples walled themselves off in ghettos and refused to learn English or marry outside their ethnicity. Even the Jews did not, hence fears for the survival of Jewishness. (My sister’s best friend, of Jewish parentage, married a guy named McClanghan). The same process can be seen with Asian and, yes, Hispanic immigrants today: consider the heirs of Jeb Bush or Nikki Haley.

Assimilation works, and in the USA it works very well. Denying this is like denying that the sun comes up in the east

#20 Comment By Strudel On February 24, 2017 @ 8:23 am

@Gerrit

I sympathize with Rod’s young author. I grew up white in apartheid South Africa…During apartheid, conservative white Christians used school, church, military, and most civic organizations like the scouts and guides, to form perfect little fascists out of entitled young white men.

Ah, the South African shows up to self-flagellate for us. Tell me, good sir, do you know how many poor white farmers died today? Or did they deserve to get hacked to pieces because of their racism for thinking the blacks in South Africa wanted to hack them to pieces.

Rod, it seems you’ve been on a journey of discovering just how hollow a shell western Christianity is….This post shows some of how very predisposed young white Christians are to fascism…

It’s easy being “christian” when times are good and you’re privileged by society. During times of resource scarcity, however, two things happen to young white Christian men. First, multiculturalism removes their privilege. Second, secularism exposes how little mental skills they have to cope in a secular society. Fascism offers them a return

Your version is the “hollow shell.” Nothing I believe about Christ or the Church would be peculiar throughout history until 1950. And if standing up against our own “privilege” is courageous, why is it the most pathetic and pampered men who do it? Our politicians, movie stars, and trust-fund brats all love the idea of surrendering white privilege.

Young white Christian men today face two options. One, compete mainly on merit in a multicultural, secular, relatively-free society.

Which, if you truly lived in South Africa, you’d know culminates in a “white supremacist” society and if you doubt this you ought to check up on your homeland after they “leveled” the playing field, or perhaps “Zimbabwe.”

People generally forget that there will be a history. There will be a record of actions. And there will be judgements: legal, societal, historical, and ultimate.

I certainly hope none of your ilk get to write the history, seeing how wrong you’ve gotten everything thus far. I suggest you go to Cape Town to spread your egalitarian views in earnest.

#21 Comment By mrscracker On February 24, 2017 @ 9:24 am

Patrick,
Thanks for your comments. No, I did understand you and that’s sort of what I asked in an earlier comment here. If folks are worried about America becoming less ” White”-and I am not one of those-
what have they personally done to add to the white population?
I was just mentioning that it’s not only white folks in the United States who have falling birthrates, it’s everyone.

#22 Comment By The Autist Formerly Known as “KD” On February 24, 2017 @ 9:59 am

Liam:

You need to read Dr. Pelikan’s essay if you want to understand the context of my statement concerning soil, language and history. As far as the future of America and that kinds of thing, I don’t think it has anything to do with anything I said.

In terms of homecoming, my statements have been interpreted as suggesting the true home is some kind of “genetic volk”, even though that did not seem to be a concern for St. Augustine, nor has it ever been a concern for most Christians in history.

As far as authenticity, I take your statement to suggest that a surgically enhance pornographic actress is a better emblem of femininity than an un-enhanced European women in traditional dress. Obviously, we have different judgments. You can have your authentic, and I can have mind.

Further, there is a form of authenticity that can be had in modernity, although in my experience it is an authentic experience of nihilism. It usually ends up destroying those who seek it, thereby making it more seductive. However, I wouldn’t speak to that because of the dangers involved.

#23 Comment By Liam On February 24, 2017 @ 12:32 pm

I did, but I don’t think your comments captured its meaning justly.

To do justice to his essay, I think you’d have to much more seriously accept and engage the Providential nature of your being and placement being rooted in the particulars of the here and now as they are, not as you’d prefer them to be. (Another way to put this: to be a Homo Viator, you have to accept that your destinations are not to replacements of the here and now; you need to be like Paul’s description (please note – I am talking about his gloss, not the historical reality it glosses) of Abraham and Sarah in Hebrews 11 – saluting an ultimate supernatural destination from a distance.)

As for St Augustine and similarly others, the particulars are still ordered to an ultimately solvent common fatherhood of God. (To put this in particularly arresting image: the final paragraph of Flannery O’Conner’s short story, “Revelation”, contains a terse but potent theological bombshell about even our virtues being burned away in the Parousia.)

As an aside, it should be remembered that Pelikan at that time was very much Lutheran, not the Orthodox Christian he later publicly revealed.

#24 Comment By Hector_St_Clare On February 24, 2017 @ 2:32 pm

Which, if you truly lived in South Africa, you’d know culminates in a “white supremacist” society and if you doubt this you ought to check up on your homeland after they “leveled” the playing field, or perhaps “Zimbabwe.”

South Africa has a whole lot of problems. You couldn’t pay me enough to live there, their performance since 1990 or so has been depressing at best, and their human development index actually declined for a portion of that period. None of that has much to do with leveling the playing field though. White people in South Africa have actually done just as well (or as poorly) as Black people, and the income gap between Blacks and Whites has barely narrowed at all. The real beneficiaries have been the Indians, and the real thing that set South African HDI back was the HIV crisis, which was not the fault of egalitarian politicians.

They are literally prioritizing the environment over having white babies, which, well, they’ve been lying about their agenda for the entire time I’ve been reading this weblog.

It’s possible to value more than one thing at the same time, you know. A group competing to have more babies than other ethnic groups ends poorly for everyone. We should be encouraging very high fertility groups to lower their fertility, not the other way round.

#25 Comment By mrscracker On February 24, 2017 @ 2:34 pm

Liam,
Thanks for mentioning Flannery O’Connor’s story Revelation. I think it’s my favorite thing she wrote.

#26 Comment By The Autist Formerly Known as “KD” On February 24, 2017 @ 4:41 pm

Liam writes:

To do justice to his essay, I think you’d have to much more seriously accept and engage the Providential nature of your being and placement being rooted in the particulars of the here and now as they are, not as you’d prefer them to be.

But that is exactly what I said, 2/22/17 at 4:04 pm.

As far being a ‘modernist’ or a ‘primordialist’, that is simply a question of attitude. Do you stand in the river of eternity, breaking through time and becoming, or do you cling to the ephemeral bits of the now.

What commonalities we find between the present and the past, these are where eternity discloses itself. All progress and regress is separable. The past is our only guide for clearly seeing in the present.

#27 Comment By Gretchen On February 24, 2017 @ 5:46 pm

I live in Kansas City, where an idiot shot two Indian guys since he thought they were Middle Eastern, because brown. My daughter is planning to come home for my birthday and bring her boyfriend, who was born on Staten Island. American, right? No, his parents are from India, and he’s brown. He thought he ought to meet her family before asking her to marry him. Now, he’s not sure he wants to come to KC and be seen out and about with a white girl. I’m afraid I thought the same thing when I heard about this. I’m sick and ashamed that this is the start of this new phase of my family. Good job, diversity opponents.

#28 Comment By Good Morning, Vietnam! On February 25, 2017 @ 1:16 am

@Gretchen: Great. You’ve discovered that there idiots in the world. Therefore, what? The incident you described says nothing about the arguments from those who see something sinister in the way diversity is dogmatically shoved down everyone’s throats. Have you read the book “White Girl Bleed A Lot”? You want to talk about racially motivated crime, well then, check it out and be prepared to be sickened.

This is coming from a former alt-right type. But it still pains me to see how people don’t get it. This type of ignorance is why the alt-right grows. Massive amounts of brazen anti-white insults, crime, etc. It’s all around you if you choose to look around. But one Indian is tragically racially discriminated against in the most egregious way–and I mean that sincerely–and you take a shot at “diversity opponents.”

#29 Comment By Good Morning, Vietnam! On February 25, 2017 @ 1:19 am

Rod: we need an edit function on this board. That, or perhaps I should be more careful before posting. Haha. Keep up all the good work, Rod! I enjoy reading each and every post.

#30 Comment By Gretchen On February 25, 2017 @ 8:45 am

Good Morning Vietnam: How is diversity shoved down your throat? I’m sincerely asking.

#31 Comment By Kevin O’Keeffe On February 25, 2017 @ 11:33 am

I’m not a Milo partisan by any means, but the idea he’s some sort of White nationalist (or that the alt-right is inherently White nationalist, for that matter), is a preposterous absurdity. I’m turning 47 this year, and ever since I was a teenager, I have been inundated with the message that White people are scum. Milo is part of the much-anticipated reaction to that multi-decade slander I’ve lived my whole life immersed in. If some so-called “conservatives” are going to squeal about “White nationalism” merely because we don’t accept our status as The Evil People, well…I can’t come up with any polite way to conclude this sentence.