Former white supremacist leader says Donald is using white supremacist recruiting tactics

Nobody says they couldn't. But if they act like they have bragging rights to owning America, because of 10-15% Native American ancestry, they're only fooling themselves.

You can identify as whatever you please, just don't expect other people to play along. Same goes for all the gender-benders and trans-racialists, and so forth. Do not expect to attain any privileges because of a self-proclaimed identity, that may or may not have a loose basis on reality.
If they have Native Ancestry that isn't trivial and identify with Native identity then they would be Native. Afterall lots of North American Native Americans have significant White ancestry. I have had friends, girlfriends who quite visibly looked to have significant White ancestry but they were bonafide Tribal members . It doesn't matter if you accept them as native or not, what matters is if the government accepts them and society at large. Some Mestizos or Mexican Americans of Amerindians ancestry are embracing their indigenous identity.
 
Central Americans have a lot of Amerindian ancestry, some are fullblooded Amerindians. As if you didn't know this...

From a racial perspective: They are Amerindians, the same race as North American Native Americans, so this whole continent is their ancestral homeland.

I don't know that at all. There were tribes running from the western states to Mexico and Canada, but all natives weren't part of 1 huge related tribe, especially Central and South American tribes.

In short the Mapuche and Inca have no ties to north America.
 
For me, the solution is to keep the most threatening collective groups "quarantined" from individualist societies, until such a time that they show a capacity to fathom what the concept entails to.

This. Exactly. Great wording.
 
People act like Martin Luther King was the same as, say, Booker T Washington. But let's look at him giving his famous speech: surrounded by Muslims, a white police officer shielding him from an approving mob.

giphy.gif


The rage against current whites today is fanned and ridiculous based on MSM fanning a white supremacist lie.
So what is your point, that there were anti racist Whites and or that the White establishment supported Civil Rights? Who is arguing against this? All my posts are about those Whites who cling to White Supremacy.
 
He's not a white nationalist. He used to be, but he hasn't been since his youth.

Make up your damn mind. Do you now believe a white supremacist or dont you? You far leftists continually change the location of the goalpost depending on the need...either a person is always a thing because you need them to be or they are not...I mean, how many times just in the last 3 months have you accused a person of being a thing because of a word or action DECADES ago?!?
 
If they have Native Ancestry that isn't trivial and identify with Native identity then they would be Native. Afterall lots of North American Native Americans have significant White ancestry. I have had friends, girlfriends who quite visibly looked to have significant White ancestry but they were bonafide Tribal members . It doesn't matter if you accept them as native or not, what matters is if the government accepts them and society at large. Some Mestizos or Mexican Americans of Amerindians ancestry are embracing their indigenous identity.

Many African-Americans have a much more significant amount of European ancestry, than Latinos have native American ancestry.

Shouldn't the black man in America be allowed to embrace their European ancestry in a similar fashion as the Latino can embrace their native American ancestry?
 
I don't know that at all. There were tribes running from the western states to Mexico and Canada, but all natives weren't part of 1 huge related tribe, especially Central and South American tribes.

In short the Mapuche and Inca have no ties to north America.
They don't have tribal ties, they have racial ties. The same way a German or Irishman has a racial tie to Europe as a whole but not necessarily when narrowed down to the tribal or ethnic level.
 
So what is your point, that there were anti racist Whites and or that the White establishment supported Civil Rights? Who is arguing against this? All my posts are about those Whites who cling to White Supremacy.

The point is trying to link white supremacy to Trump and the majority of his voting base is flat out lying and manipulation by the MSM.
 
This. Exactly. Great wording.

You do not want to introduce a pest to a perfectly functioning bio-system. In the same way, you do not want to introduce a collective hive-mind working towards its own end, to a society consisting of individuals, working to improve their individual self.
 
You do not want to introduce a pest to a perfectly functioning bio-system. In the same way, you do not want to introduce a collective hive-mind working towards its own end, to a society consisting of individuals, working to improve their individual self.
See my sig:
I call an animal, a species, an individual corrupt, when it loses its instincts, when it chooses, when it prefers, what is injurious to it.
 
They don't have tribal ties, they have racial ties. The same way a German or Irishman has a racial tie to Europe as a whole but not necessarily when narrowed down to the tribal or ethnic level.

Having a racial tie to a continent, does not mean that you can proclaim ownership over it in its entirety, though. You can see how well that worked for the Germans, historically.

The South American has no further claims over territories residing in North America, than just about anybody. He does have a claim to the regions that have historically belonged to him. Germans in Germany, the Irish in Ireland, and the South/Central American native in the territories belonging to him.

If the Aztecs had wanted a piece of land in North America, they would have had to fight the North American native over it. No differently from the European.
 
Make up your damn mind. Do you now believe a white supremacist or dont you? You far leftists continually change the location of the goalpost depending on the need...either a person is always a thing because you need them to be or they are not...I mean, how many times just in the last 3 months have you accused a person of being a thing because of a word or action DECADES ago?!?

I'm not a leftist at all.
 
The fact that Obama left us with a presidential portrait painted by an artist who painted at least two pictures of black women decapitating white women, speaks volumes of Barack's presidency.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/feb/13/kehinde-wiley-barack-obamas-portrait-artist-painte/

"The artist who painted former President Barack Obama’s official presidential portrait unveiled Monday is facing scrutiny for past works that depict black women decapitating white women.

Kehinde Wiley, a New York City-based artist who became the first black American to ever paint an official presidential portrait, unveiled two paintings in 2012 that began circulating on social media this week.

“It’s sort of a play on the ‘kill whitey’ thing,” Mr. Wiley told The New Yorker in a 2012 interview.

Both paintings, titled “Judith Beheading Holofernes,” portray Judith beheading the Assyrian general Holofernes from the deuterocanonical Book of Judith. In Mr. Wiley’s versions, Judith is a black woman holding the severed head of a white woman."

And this doesn't even go into the fact that the black painter has only painted black people.
 
See my sig:
I call an animal, a species, an individual corrupt, when it loses its instincts, when it chooses, when it prefers, what is injurious to it.

For the individual to exist in his preferred individualist society, he has to fight twice as hard, and has to be twice as cunning, and twice as tough, than the parts of the collective which enhance their chances of survival through the "symbiosis" which they form amongst one another.

It's a perilous game to play, liberating for the mind, but very tasking intellectually and physically, in the long term. All animals find it easier to survive in a pack, than as lone wolves. Humans are no different.

That is not an argument for descending to collectivism, but it is a reality that all individuals must acknowledge. When they do not, they perish.
 
... said Native Americans circa 1620
So what are you an ethnomasochist and want to see it happen again hundreds of years later?

I guess the Japanese deserve progressive liberalism too because of what they did to the Ainu?
 
So what are you an ethnomasochist and want to see it happen again hundreds of years later?

I guess the Japanese deserve progressive liberalism too because of what they did to the Ainu?

I could not even theoretically give less of a fuck as a non-American, just saying you've nothing to complain about, what goes around comes around ;)
 
I could not even theoretically give less of a fuck as a non-American, just saying you've nothing to complain about, what goes around comes around ;)

As long as you realize how absurd and stupid your way of thinking is, we're cool.

Where are you from by the way?

Every central and south American country is just waiting to get theirs too I guess?

You want to give these countries over to people that have worse histories and treatment of people over longer periods of time.

Will the people that take over deserve the same fate? A never ending cycle.
 
The Founders were clearly White Supremacist. I mean how can one argue otherwise , considering what was done to the Native Americans

So the whites were harsh to the Indians because they were brown? Lmao never change dude
 
Back
Top