A commenter below helpfully provided links to pages talking about increases in hate group counts. As you suggest, this could mean either more hate groups, a more effective SPLC (that's better at finding them), or a broader definition. The last one might be written in the original reports somewhere. I have no idea how to distinguish the first two.
It seems like the definition is "broadened" but no actual definition is provided. All we can look at is who gets labeled as "white supremacist" and draw our own inferences. Notably, a lot of garden-variety egalitarians--people who are against any kind of racial ideology including critical race theory, "anti-racism", and other left-wing racial ideologies--are frequently labeled "white supremacist" (including an awful lot of people of color, jewish people, homosexuals, etc).
We should be very wary of rhetoric that depends on changing definitions of terms without providing precise definitions (see also "racism"). Put differently, everyone's ideas should be criticized on their own terms, but you oughtn't be taken seriously if you don't even define your own terms (and defining them in terms of other poorly defined terms--e.g., "'anti-racism' opposing racism"--doesn't count).
The status quo is not explicitly racist, and a lot of people are comfortable with it. The push by the left is to suggest that just because a system does not have discriminatory laws, that doesn't mean it's not oppressive. Take the prevalence of indentured servitude after the Civil War as an example. I'd recommend "The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness" for a lucid account of the racial issues in current America.
If you can be convinced that the status quo is oppressive to racial minorities, then it serves to perpetuate white supremacy.
I don't follow your first point, since it seems clear to me that people of color, jewish people, and homosexuals are able to hold white supremacist viewpoints.
On the contrary, I've been traveling across the US quite a bit over the last several months, from New England, the PNW, and the South. While I've seen plenty of signs and a few rallies supporting BLM and other progressive causes, I've yet to see, in person, a single sign or rally or any supportive material for white supremacy. I hear about it a lot on the internet but from my travels anyway I haven't seen it yet.
Edit: I did see some confederate flags being flown in middle of nowhere Mississippi, but I honestly believe they're not flown as a symbol of hatred (at least not always) as some people had banners next to their flags saying things like "Pride not hate", or the rainbow flag, or other phrases trying to distance themselves from the negative connotations of the flag.
I had one almost happen in my town (in NJ). We had to counter rally to chase them out. There are fewer physical rallies because the ones they try to do are often successfully suppressed. Recall Boston in 2017. Unite the Right (not suppressed and resulted in a murder). etc.
If you go to certain left wing rallies, they WILL show up. I have seen real live nazis screaming at my friends at an anti-ICE rally.
The problem with these guys is they do have a narrative that is appealing to a certain set of people about nationalism and certain ethnic enemies that care creating the problems. The idea is to prevent their growth and flourishing because if you see them get very common, we are in deep trouble... though given the debate tonight with the president signaling "Stand Back. Stand By." to the Proud Boys, I sense a creeping darkness.
Unfortunately for them, one doesn't really get to choose how other people interpret the symbols one uses, as anyone who's ever tried to do something weird in a protocol and then hope a code comment will stop developers of the future from screwing up the code around the weirdness can attest.
The definition of it has widened to include more groups than before. The original groups are about the same size.
A commenter below helpfully provided links to pages talking about increases in hate group counts. As you suggest, this could mean either more hate groups, a more effective SPLC (that's better at finding them), or a broader definition. The last one might be written in the original reports somewhere. I have no idea how to distinguish the first two.
It seems like the definition is "broadened" but no actual definition is provided. All we can look at is who gets labeled as "white supremacist" and draw our own inferences. Notably, a lot of garden-variety egalitarians--people who are against any kind of racial ideology including critical race theory, "anti-racism", and other left-wing racial ideologies--are frequently labeled "white supremacist" (including an awful lot of people of color, jewish people, homosexuals, etc).
We should be very wary of rhetoric that depends on changing definitions of terms without providing precise definitions (see also "racism"). Put differently, everyone's ideas should be criticized on their own terms, but you oughtn't be taken seriously if you don't even define your own terms (and defining them in terms of other poorly defined terms--e.g., "'anti-racism' opposing racism"--doesn't count).
The status quo is not explicitly racist, and a lot of people are comfortable with it. The push by the left is to suggest that just because a system does not have discriminatory laws, that doesn't mean it's not oppressive. Take the prevalence of indentured servitude after the Civil War as an example. I'd recommend "The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness" for a lucid account of the racial issues in current America.
If you can be convinced that the status quo is oppressive to racial minorities, then it serves to perpetuate white supremacy.
I don't follow your first point, since it seems clear to me that people of color, jewish people, and homosexuals are able to hold white supremacist viewpoints.
16 replies →
This is a question that I have wondered about. It feels like it’s just being heavily advertised more so than gaining any traction.
Don't get out much, eh?
On the contrary, I've been traveling across the US quite a bit over the last several months, from New England, the PNW, and the South. While I've seen plenty of signs and a few rallies supporting BLM and other progressive causes, I've yet to see, in person, a single sign or rally or any supportive material for white supremacy. I hear about it a lot on the internet but from my travels anyway I haven't seen it yet.
Edit: I did see some confederate flags being flown in middle of nowhere Mississippi, but I honestly believe they're not flown as a symbol of hatred (at least not always) as some people had banners next to their flags saying things like "Pride not hate", or the rainbow flag, or other phrases trying to distance themselves from the negative connotations of the flag.
I had one almost happen in my town (in NJ). We had to counter rally to chase them out. There are fewer physical rallies because the ones they try to do are often successfully suppressed. Recall Boston in 2017. Unite the Right (not suppressed and resulted in a murder). etc.
If you go to certain left wing rallies, they WILL show up. I have seen real live nazis screaming at my friends at an anti-ICE rally.
The problem with these guys is they do have a narrative that is appealing to a certain set of people about nationalism and certain ethnic enemies that care creating the problems. The idea is to prevent their growth and flourishing because if you see them get very common, we are in deep trouble... though given the debate tonight with the president signaling "Stand Back. Stand By." to the Proud Boys, I sense a creeping darkness.
Unfortunately for them, one doesn't really get to choose how other people interpret the symbols one uses, as anyone who's ever tried to do something weird in a protocol and then hope a code comment will stop developers of the future from screwing up the code around the weirdness can attest.
4 replies →
In short, yes, there's quite a bit of evidence of this.
https://www.factcheck.org/2019/03/the-facts-on-white-nationa...
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/18/white-national...
Your first link literally says “FactCheck.org Rating: Experts Disagree”
There's disagreement, but evidence was asked for, not consensus.