White Nationalism

The white race is a social construct. So is the black race, the yellow race and red race. Race itself is not a social construct. It certainly exists, but its more complicated than the lazy attempt to explain the differences in different groups of people based on an arbitrarily chosen colour.

When I was in first grade, 7 years old, sitting in art class I held a white crayon in my hand and compared it to my arm, since I had heard I was supposedly white skinned. The crayon and my skin colour did not match. I didn’t get it, why were we called white skinned? I had another crayon that resembled my skin colour, it did not match completely, but it was much closer. I still don’t know what that colour is called. I’ve also heard the word “pink” being used for our skin colour, but that’s quite inaccurate too. Why is there no word for the colour of my skin?

The colour black used for the skin colour of Africans isn’t much better, since most of them are brown, not black. The tone varies based on their geographical area. For instance Ethiopians seem fairly light brown, and Congolese are much darker. They’re still not black. Another confusion in the term black people is that “black” or dark brown skin in not limited to the African Negroid people. Indians from, you know, India can be as “black” as the Africans.

I’m not so sure East-Asians like Chinese, Japanese and Koreans are that yellow either. Their skin colour looks quite similar to the Europeans to me, although some Chinese are certainly more brown. But then again I’ve seen several Chinese and Japanese whose skin colour is whiter than the average European’s.

I’ve never met a proper native American Indian, so I cannot say whether or not red skinned is applicable to them. But I am sceptical of it.


Origin of Colour Categories

I don’t know where these categories of race and colour originated, but I imagine it might have been 19th century America. Back then there were “white”, “black”, “red” and even some “yellow” people in the US. The people needed some way to address their obvious racial differences in a quick manner, and thus these colours were used the distinguish them. Back then, this social convention was probably adequate, but I don’t understand why we are still using these archaic distinctions in the 21st century?

I don’t think it’s racist or offensive, except in the sense that it’s inaccurate and confusing. It is not “hate-speech” to call someone white, black or yellow skinned, but it’s inaccurate. To me, as an official member of the language Nazi party, that is one of the greatest crimes imaginable.

There are terms Caucasian, Negroid and Mongoloid for these different racial groups, but they have their own problems. Caucasian ties us to the Caucasus mountains, and I don’t know why the term is used, or if those mountains have any specific meaning for “white” people. Mongoloid assumes that the Mongols are the generic representative of the Asian races, which I don’t agree with being much more familiar with East-Asia. I do kind of the like words Negroid and Negro, but I know many people would disagree with that assessment.

I don’t have a solution for this problem, except that the terms and words we have now are inaccurate and not sufficient. We need to redefine terms. Enough blabbering about this, let’s get down to business.


White Nationalism

White Nationalism has recently been mentioned ever-increasingly in the alternative media. Taking into account what I said above, it should hint that I’m sceptical about it. I don’t think it’s evil or racist. I do recognize that the people who call themselves White Nationalists are searching for their own identity in this multi-cultural chaos, which is something I appreciate. But since I don’t think the white race really exists, I don’t think White Nationalism is a valid ideology.

This whole concept of the white race sounds more like a definition used by the enemies of the various European races. The white peoples of Europe are Germanic, Latin, Slavic, Finno-Hungarian and so on. Calling them white works only as a rough generalization. I imagine it was originally coined by people from a race/religion that hates all of the European races anyway, if you catch my drift. In a sense, calling the European nations being part of the white race refutes the uniqueness and exploits of each particular race.

White Nationalism sounds like an American thing, I don’t think we need it in Europe. Since many of the “white” Americans notice they have more in common with each other than non-“white” Americans, although the “white” Americans hail from various different nations in Europe originally. It would probably be quite odd if someone with Scottish ancestry, but whose family has lived in the States for centuries, suddenly declared himself Scottish, since he’s not. Same goes for English, Germans, et al. There’s a difference between having ancestry tied to a certain race or geographic area to physically being part of that group. So I don’t see Americans asserting their identity based on their individual European origins as a valid option.

So how about “white” Americans just call themselves Americans? They do obviously have their roots in Europe, but they are not Europeans anymore. Or if that’s somehow excluding being American from African-Americans and Asian-Americans, how about call themselves European-American? European-American could be viewed as a new race compiled from various European races.


Racial Purity

While I do sympathize with members of any race wanting to live in a community where the majority is racially homogenic, I don’t see any 100% pure “white” communities as a practical or reasonable option. Who is going to define what is “white” anyway? How are you going to enforce it? Do genetic tests on everyone to ensure they’re completely white? Once again, what is white anyways? I don’t think genetics are that black and white (pardon the pun). If a white guy has a black/yellow wife, are you going to exile him?

I do understand that White Nationalists want to live with their own, nothing wrong with that, but you have to be able to distinguish between a community that’s completely multi-cultural, which often leads to chaos, and having a fairly homogenic community with a little bit of diversity. Seoul in South Korea certainly has lots of foreigners these days, but there’s no confusion that Koreans are still the majority, and rule the country (at least on the surface, but that is a political issue, not a racial one).



I applaud that the White Nationalists are searching for their ethnic identity, but I think White Nationalism is based on some false assumptions and cultural constructs. If they are serious about this stuff, they should look beyond it.


4 thoughts on “White Nationalism”

  1. I’ve been reading your blog and I share your view of things, the problem with the Europeans and Middle-Eastern folks is that their culture has been utterly ruined by jews, Christianity and Islam are jewish creations like Marxism, Freudism, Neoconservatism of today, its all about putting jews at the center of World and furthering their goals.

    People are attracted to Asia because its the only region of the World that escaped the jewish revolutionary fury but not completely, China is communist thanks to Mao jewish-american adivisers like Sidney Rittenberg, same North Korea and South Korea is almost becoming another Christian country, the reason why Japan was nuked was because they modernised without accepting jewish ideologies or religions, they could have liberated Asia from the jewish-anglo-american domination.

    1. I agree with the basic idea of the negative Jewish influence, but there is the great problem of what is a Jew anyway? I don’t know if anyone really knows whether Judaism is a race or a religion or both. We can easily see that many of the nasty people controlling our world are Jews, as many of the people controlling global media, Hollywood, US foreign policy and so on, are Jews. Although there are many people in those positions who are not Jews. And the majority of Jews in this world are not in any way directly responsible for this mess we’re in. Yet it is hardly an accident that a lot of these powerful people in key positions are Jews or sympathetic to Zionism.

      So I wouldn’t point my finger and say “it’s the Jews!”. Rather I would say “it’s the Jews and a bunch of other people and groups”. In a way Jews can act as a buffer against seeing the conspiracy as a whole, if we focus solely on the Jewish aspect, which is significant in its magnitude, but I’m not convinced it is purely a Jewish conpiracy at its core. Moreover, since I don’t know what a Jew or Jewishness is, I cannot say that a conspiracy is Jewish either, except that it has Jewish characteristics.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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