White Nationalism is considered by the mainstream to be generally a so-called “Right Wing” movement. Most of its adherents espouse a hatred for communism. Most of them consider themselves patriotic. Last but not least, they have often played the role of the easy target whipping boys for Hard Left propaganda to the masses. That definitely solidifies the ideology’s Right Wing credentials, right? White Rights are Right, Right?

Wrong. White Nationalism is a blue pill being marketed in a red wrapper. As with it’s presumed Left Wing opposite counterpart, Black Nationalism, White Nationalism twists the real meaning of the word “Nation” into something that can only exist within a Leftist framework. A real Nation is made up of People, Culture and Land. If Nations are to be aligned as such only on the basis of skin color, all Nations are giving up their rights to their cultures and lands in trade for what? A grey internationalist blob whose only requirement for inclusion is white skin and (in most versions) a non-Jewish identity? To lump all white-skinned Peoples into One Group is just thinly veiled multiculturalism.

The US Census Bureau defines White people as follows: “White” refers to a person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East or North Africa. It includes people who indicated their race(s) as “White” or reported entries such as Irish, German, Italian, Lebanese, Arab, Moroccan or Caucasian. Thus, in the US, being pretty much anything other than east Asian, South American or sub-Saharan African is legally considered “white”.
So, why aren’t White Nationalists cheering for the current influx of millions of “White” people flooding into Europe and the US from the Middle East?
Clearly “white” has such a very loose definition that the government (almost all white at the time that definition was put into place) can’t pin it down either. Of course, most White Nationalists, hell, most people period, aren’t going to agree that brown skinned Moroccans are white. Most Arabs even consider Moroccans to be black Africans. However, it’s clear that any definition of “white people” is multinational & multicultural.

Yet, each “white” Nation is unique, not just linguistically but genetically, culturally and topographically. Can a mixed-white “Eurotrash” American really share much in common with a Polish Nationalist who grew up under Communism? Can a seaside Englishman truly relate to a rural Russian? Can a Swede really relate to a Greek? Do all white-skinned Nations share the same experience? They have usually no shared language, no shared history (except for occasional miscegenation, usually via war), no shared Traditional foods, clothing or rituals outside of the most basic/common Christian holidays for a majority of them. They really share nothing other than “whiteness”. Their hair is different, their eyes are different, they are simply DIFFERENT.

In fact, each white skinned ethnic group is so very different that White Nationalists, whom define themselves by their own whiteness can’t seem to agree on what even qualifies as “white”. Is it simply white skin? Are you white if blacks treat you like you’re white? Is whiteness defined by the viewpoint of anti-white leftists? Many groups, like Volksfront only require that one looks white and isn’t a Jew for inclusion.

Yet, plenty of people with white skin and apparently European features come from a racially mixed background. My daughter looks very white, but I am clearly not white. Actress Heather Locklear is descended from the black Gullah-Geechee community, but most view her as a blonde, white actress and don’t associate her with blackness.
Furthermore, what about someone who has a white skinned Ashkenazi Jewish father but, say, a Finnish mother? That person isn’t considered Jewish, and if they follow Christian culture, they might appear as a typical white person to non-whites, and be attacked as such, yet most White Nationalists would reject that person for having a partial Jewish background. There are even a few Ashkenazi Jews stupid enough to think that they are “trans-goys” who identify as white because anti-white blacks think they are the same as all other white skinned people. Next thing you know, since biracial Barack Obama can be accepted as identifying as black because whites supposedly treated him as such, even though he’s 50% white, you will see other mulattos identifying as white because blacks supposedly treat them as such.

It’s getting to the point where self-identification is becoming the norm amongst both Black and White Nationalists (“I’m part Cuban but identify as white because blacks treat me like a cracker!”), similar to the gender-bender trend where people can just “identify as” whatever they want, as if that magically transforms them into their fantasy selves.

Nordicists who think only countries founded by Vikings and have a higher percentage of blondes among their population count as white may accept Icelandic people (who are actually a mixed-race ethnicity combining the native dark-skinned Thule tribe with Vikings), but may have a difficult time accepting Greeks and Italians as their White Brothers. Yet there are many Italian and Greek White Nationalists who have a so-called “purer bloodline” than Icelanders. No amount of syncretic fascistic looking symbols on jackets or sockpuppet accounts on Stormfront will ever make all whites equal.

The same of course can be said for Black Nationalism, which lumps African-Americans (most of whom have at least a small percentage of white or Hispanic heritage) in with Haitians, Swahilis , Somalis and Ubuntu. Naturally, a black American-born and raised person has very little in common with a person from the Congo. The Africans who traded their kin into the Arab slave trade have little reason to associate themselves descendants of those slaves in the New World. Even within the African continent, what concern does a witch doctor in the sub-Saharan wilderness have for a cab driver in Capetown? No amount of fake dashikis or Made In China afro combs will truly unite people who have almost nothing in common. You just end up with more self-identification, like the Rachel Dolezal case of trying to feign heritage just for political inclusion. However, Black Nationalism doesn’t deny its leftist origins and doesn’t falsely purport itself to be Right Wing , whereas White Nationalism tends to do just that.

Ethnic Nationalism, however, doesn’t carry quite as much Leftist baggage. Ethnic Nationalism, unlike Racial Nationalism, generally has utmost concern for the Culture, Language and Land of a People. For example, Irish Nationalism, for historical reasons, tends to be in political opposition English Nationalism. Under the banner of White Nationalism, these two political & cultural opponents are expected to unite because of skin color & some genetic minutiae that makes the two somehow part of One Nation. Nevermind that our grandparents killed each other and the fact that we invaded your land and outlawed your religion & language, we’re all white here, right?
Ethnic Nationalism also has less issues in defining inclusion. Since a Nation is made up of People, Culture and Land, if you’re of that particular culture and descended from (or completed whatever traditional ritual to join & pledge your allegiance to) the people from that land, you’re part of that respective group.

Are the Russians and Ukrainians going to lay down their guns because both sides of the conflict in Donetsk happen to have white skin? What about white skinned Muslims in Kosovo? Are they likely to see the beautiful white skin of the ethnic Serbs and forget all the atrocities committed between the two groups?
White Nationalism could only possibly unite so many diametrically opposed white skinned ethnic groups by the force of an international government completely suppressing all expression of their local traditional cultures and redistributing wealth from the rich white lands amongst the poorer ones, which is called Communism.

I don’t think it’s a coincidence that both White Nationalism and Black Nationalism really began to gain publicity during the 1960s & 1970s, the same eras that the Leftist infiltration of Western governments really began to gain strength. This type of multiculturalism is simply an ease into Globalism. First, implant the idea that all whites are the same and should be considered one group, all blacks are the same and should be considered one group, next it’s easier to implant the idea that all people in general are the same and should be considered One Group.



  1. “Ethnic Nationalism also has less issues in defining inclusion. Since a Nation is made up of People, Culture and Land, if you’re of that particular culture and descended from (or completed whatever traditional ritual to join & pledge your allegiance to) the people from that land, you’re part of that respective group.”

    Doesn’t this qualify as cultural, rather than ethnic, nationalism?


    • Sorry I just noticed this here now!
      The issue can be nebulous in some cases, such as ethnoreligious groups or national-ethnic cultures, but generally, ethnicity is who you are & culture is how you live. America has a culture, but American isn’t an ethnicity. Cultural Nationalism will include anyone who assimilates into a culture regardless of their ethnicity, EthnoNationalism will include only those within that ethnic group.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s