The UK Independent Compares White Nationalists to ISIS—Here’s What the Actual Statistics Say

White Nationalists are not Terrorists or Purveyors of Violence

This is the hatred and slander we deal with folks.

The UK independent recently heralded the great news that White Nationalists have grown massively in numbers over the last five years. But that’s not how they framed the piece. It was really a hit piece, attempting to subtly imply that White Nationalists are terrorists, worthy of being compared to ISIS of all things.

While anyone truly familiar with the White rights movement knows this is nothing but pure slander, I think it’s important to highlight why it is slander. The Independent was not the first, and I am sure will not be the last, to try to paint the whole pro-White movement as a viper’s nest of incubating domestic terrorists. Let’s take a look at the numbers to see just how truly ridiculous it is to claim that White Nationalists produce a high volume of terrorists.

Terrorism and Political Delegitimization:

Accusing political opponents of involvement in or promoting terrorism has become a common way to attempt to diminish them. In full transparency this tactic—like terrorism itself—is employed from time to time within all political movements. This is with all the best intentions, since real terrorism—politically or ideologically motivated violence—is certainly an evil worthy of full and complete condemnation. The problem is that simply tarring your opponents with accusations of terrorism when such accusations are false or misleading is also wrong. And, it can be pretty embarrassing if, like the anti-White media, you lie about something so transparently false.

It can be easier to lie about crime statistics with regard to political and ideological affiliations because reliable statistics on these demographic categories are harder to find. Obviously, we can’t go to the justice department as we might if we were looking for racial crime statistics, since the government doesn’t keep any crime statistics by ideological affiliation. So, we have to look for other sources.

Note: terrorism can be extremely difficult to track and count accurately, and statistics may not always come up to date quickly. For that reason, some of the statistics I cite here are necessarily older than I would like, but they are the most recent of their kind I have located.

ISIS Statistics:

First, let’s look at what White Nationalists are being compared too: ISIS, in particular, and to a lesser extent, all Islamic terrorism.

Regarding Islamic terrorism, it is sufficient to note that, worldwide, Muslims are by far the majority of perpetrators of terrorist attacks. According to the 2010 Department of National Intelligence (DNI) terrorism report, Muslims were responsible for almost 60% of all terrorist attacks worldwide in 2010, 70% of deaths from terrorists in that same year, and 62% of deaths from terrorism in 2009. That all being said, it should be noted that Islamic terrorism still accounts for a very small percentage of all terrorist attacks carried out in White western countries: most Islamic terrorism happens in Muslim, or at least non-White, countries. (Note: I by no means endorse much of what is said at the immediately preceding link; it is there for the info).

As far as ISIS in particular goes, here is the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START)’s 2015 report on ISIS terror activity:

Between 2002 and 2015, more than 4,900 terrorist attacks were carried out by groups or organizations affiliated with the organization now known as the Islamic State. These attacks caused more than 33,000 deaths and 41,000 injuries (including perpetrator casualties), and involved more than 11,000 individuals held hostage or kidnapped. Excluding incidents where the perpetrator group was not identified, these attacks represented 13 percent of all terrorist attacks worldwide, 26 percent of all deaths, 28 percent of all injuries, and 24 percent of all kidnap victims or hostages due to terrorism during the same time period

So, that’s for comparison. Now, let’s talk about Non-Muslim terrorism:

Who Commits More Terrorism, the Left or the Right?

In order to talk about pro-White terrorism in particular we need to understand that most of the organizations or government bodies that track terrorism have multiple layers of classification for different groups. For instance, we should realize that all of these organizations will classify White Nationalists as right wing, Communists would be left wing, etc, and many times, these smaller ideological sub-groups are not listed separately or given their own categories. This can change depending on the number of terrorist attacks they commit (or less academic factors like bias).

Right now though, let’s start at the macro level: we aren’t asking here about White Nationalists in particular, but rather about the right and left as a whole. The left seems much more fond generally, of making accusations of terrorism against right-wing sub-groups, than the right does against left-wing sub-groups. This is unfortunate because all of the data shows that the left actually commits significantly more terrorism than the right.

When I took a class on the academic study of terrorism as a part of my duel history and political science major in college, the book we were reading noted that left wing groups committed terrorism more often, but that, at the point that book was written (I took the class in 2011), right wing groups tended to kill more when they did commit it. I don’t know if that is still true or not, or how the book was classifying right wing (but note, that although White Nationalists would be included in the right-wing total, they would almost certainly constitute only the tiniest fraction of all right-wing terrorism).

The pattern of leftist proclivities for terrorism is very marked when you take a long view. START’s long term study of terrorism in the United States found that between 1970 and 2011 the left had twice as many active terrorist groups as the right: they found that during this time period “11 percent of the perpetrator groups were classified as extreme right-wing, and 22 percent were categorized as extreme left-wing.”

So, who commits more terrorism? Unquestionably the left.

Narrowing the Focus—Pro-White Terrorism?:

Sources to estimate the number of White Nationalist related or pro-White terrorist incidents are a little more scattered; they are there if you know where to look.

We will, perhaps appropriately, start with the START/GTD database. The START database at the GTD (Global Terrorism Database) allow the searching of the number and nature of terrorist attacks in the United States by those groups which the GTD/START consider to be “racist”. Their dataset is lengthy, spanning forty-two years, from 1970 – 2012. This is, as far as I know, currently the most well respected and comprehensive database of terrorist incidents worldwide freely available to the public.

It is clear that they are ONLY considering White or Jewish groups to fall into this category, since they list “Black nationalist” under the left-wing ideologies, and specifically note that all the “racist” groups are put under the right-wing ideologies. In their dataset, there are a total of fourteen groups which they labeled “racist”, but I have excluded two of them (May 15 Organization for the Liberation of Palestine, and United Jewish Underground) because they are clearly not Pro-White groups. The remaining twelve groups are responsible for a whopping 15 deaths, and 44 injuries, in 57 incidents over this 42 year time span.

That’s right. Pro-White groups killed only 15 people, and injured only 44, in terrorist incidents over almost have a century.

The START/GTD database also tracks terrorism by groups they label “anti-racist.” While I don’t trust them to accurately catch all such groups in this label due to bias (and indeed, it looks like the only groups listed are 60’s era groups, and none of the modern violent anti-racist groups are listed here), it’s still useful to have a look. Let’s see how many terrorism incidents they were involved in. The database lists five groups labeled “anti-racist” but I am excluding one (Veterans United for Non-Religious Memorials). So, what is the terrorism record for “anti-racists” (as defined by the GTD)? 26 deaths, 75 injuries, in 82 incidents over the 42 year period from 1970 – 2012.

For all groups which START/GTD considered to be “extreme left-wing” (31 groups), there were over this same time period 449 terrorist incidents, which caused 576 injuries, and 567 deaths. (Because White Nationalists and other Pro-White actors are sufficiently different from the Neo-conservative right-wing, I don’t consider it relevant to compare to the “extreme right-wing” as a whole here, but the data is all there for anyone who wants to look.) Here is a table with these numbers:

Terrorism Statistics from the START/GTD Database for the US

(attacks between 1970 and 2012)

  Number of Terrorist Incidents/Attacks: Number of Deaths: Number of Injuries:
Pro-White Groups (i.e. “Racist” groups in GTD parlance): 57 15 44
“Anti-Racist” Groups (as defined by the GTD): 82 26 75
All “Extreme Left-Wing” Groups: 449 567 576

The results we just went through were obtained using the codebook and excel dataset on terrorist incidents in the United States in conjunction with an advanced search of the online GTdatabase.

Another dataset is the former Worldwide Incidents Tracking System of the FBI, which as the Council of Conservative Citizens reported in 2010, counted only 6 terrorist incidents, 4 deaths, and 8 injuries as a result of “Neonazis/Fascists/White supremacists” (their names for us, not ours—and not accurate) terrorism in the US between 2001 and 2010. In contrast, “Jewish extremist” during this same time period in their database, had 52 terrorist attacks, 6 deaths, and 71 injuries; “secular/political/anarchist” (not broken down by left or right wing) had 16,458 incidents and 15,862 deaths; and all “Islamic extremist” together had 17,835 incidents and left 40,142 dead. Of all the perpetrator categories listed in this database, the “Neonazis/Fascists/White supremacists” had the LEAST number of terrorist attacks—even less than Hindus—and the second lowest death count (only “Environmental/Anti-Globalization” terrorists killed fewer people)!

And yet, the Independent talks about White Nationalists as if we are violent people!

What Anti-White Researchers Admit:

The fact that White Nationalists and White Rights Activists are NOT violence-prone has been admitted multiple times by even the most vocal anti-White melanosupremacists. That would be the SPLC and their spokespeople. Most of the groups they falsely label “hate groups” are pro-White groups. If anyone is going to exaggerate against White Nationalists, it would be the SPLC. Thus, you can definitely bet that they will NOT be underestimating the numbers they give in any way.

It is convenient that they have some statistics about what percentage of ‘hate crimes’ are committed by members of what they consider to be ‘hate groups’. Are you ready? 5 -6%.  That’s right. That’s all that the SPLC has been able to blame White Nationalist organizations for: 6% of ‘hate crimes’. With all of their whining about how dangerous their supposed ‘hate groups’ are, it is a fact, even verified by themselves, that 95% of all reported and/or officially designated ‘hate crimes’ are committed by so-called “lone wolves”—i.e. people who are unaffiliated with any particular organization.

So, even the SPLC admits that White Nationalist and White Rights organizations are almost never terrorist organizations. Their own statistics lead to the conclusion that “hate groups commit almost no violence” as one writer bluntly put it. But they still want you to believe that pro-White “lone wolves” are lurking on every street corner. No again; the statistics prove this wrong also:

Federal Hate Crime Statistics:

The SPLC is constantly accusing perfectly peaceful and law-abiding White Rights activists and White Nationalist organizations of somehow inciting “lone wolf” terrorists via the internet. This was on full display during their persecution of the CofCC following the unfortunate—and extremely rare and atypical—Dylan Roof affair. They would like everyone to believe that all of these perfectly peaceful groups which are in no way advocating violence are somehow electrifying hundreds of Dylan Roof’s all over the place—and that such “right wing domestic terrorism” is the leading terrorist problem in the country. But federal hate crime statistics bear out the utter falsehood of this claim.

Federal crime statistics, including hate crime statistics, prove that any pro-White “lone wolves” out there are indeed few and far between.

To start with, statistics show White on non-White violent crime to be extremely rare, and it is particularly rare when one considers only those crimes which could be seen as having racial overtones. Of all the violent crimes each year which involve Blacks and Whites, 85% have a black perpetrator and a White victim, and only 15% have a White perpetrator and a Black victim. Not anywhere near all of those 15% will be ideologically or racially motivated crimes. Although it’s hard to pinpoint an exact number, officially designated ‘hate crimes’ make up only about 3% of total violent crime reported every year (only about 40% of that 3% are reported to police, of which only about 8% are determined by law enforcement to be credible—i.e. to actually have been motivated by bias). Now, bearing in mind that ANY interracial crime with a White perpetrator is infrequent compared to the reverse, let’s take a closer look at the breakdown of officially designated “hate crimes.”

Before looking at the federal hate crime statistics though, we should note what they do and don’t tell us: They do not tell us whether a perpetrator of any given “hate crime” was a White Nationalist, a racialist, or had pro-White motivations. In fact, they don’t tell us anything about the ideology of the perpetrator at all. So, they can’t tell us exactly how many officially designated “hate crimes” were committed by self-described White Nationalists or for Pro-White reasons. BUT what they can do is establish an upper-limit to the number and percentage of such “hate crimes” that could be pro-White.

That is because they do record a few pertinent facts about each alleged “hate crime”: the race, etc. of both the perpetrator and victim, and the alleged category (i.e. race, sex, disability, etc.) upon which the crime was committed. One thing we can know, is that if there is pro-White violence, it will almost always involve (1) a White perpetrator, (2) a non-White victim, and (3) race as the targeted characteristic of the victim. Thus, if we can establish a number for crimes that fit this profile, than we have established an upper boundary to the number of such crimes that could be pro-White. And the federal hate crime statistics can tell us all of those things.

Let’s examine them. Please note that these are reported crimes (only about 8% of which are confirmed), so the numbers here could easily be influenced by certain groups being more willing to report an incident as a “hate crime”:

Here are the figures for 2013, from the FBI. You can find the relevant table here. These statistics show us that no matter how you slice it, “hate crimes” committed by White people against non-Whites for racial reasons, account for not even a quarter of “hate crimes” (summing the numbers for White perpetrator and anti-Black or African American, anti-American Indian or Alaska Native, anti-Asian, anti-Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, anti-Multiple races, and anti-Jewish, motivation and then finding the percentage of the whole you come to 23.6%).

Please note that “hate crimes” with a racial motivation far outnumbered “hate crimes” with any other motivation: 49.1% of all “hate crimes” had a racial motivation.  Of “hate crimes with a racial motivation (includes anti-Jewish motivation), 48% were committed by White perpetrators against non-Whites: a significant underrepresentation since White people still make up from 72 – 77% of the total population. Racially motivated “hate crimes” (again, includes anti-Jewish) committed by Blacks on non-Blacks, accounted for 11.6% of racially motivated “hate crimes” a very slight underrepresentation, since Blacks makeup between 12 – 13% of the population as a whole. This makes Blacks actually more likely to commit racially motivated “hate crimes” than Whites: using the Census Bureau’s 2013 population figures for each race, these numbers mean that approximately 1% (.98%) of Blacks committed a racially motivated “hate crime” against another race as compared to 0.8% of Whites.

Remember now, that a “hate crime” is not the same thing as terrorism. While racially motivated terrorism would always count as a “hate crime” by no means are all so-called “hate crimes” terrorism. Many are merely simple assaults or intimidation where a racial slur was allegedly thrown in by someone in the heat of an argument. Such a crime is not likely to be politically motivated at all, and certainly doesn’t rise to the level of terrorism.

So, to conclude the “hate crime” discussion:

  • “Hate crimes” account for only about 3% of all violent crimes committed. The ceiling for possible pro-White “hate crime” is no more than 23% of that 3% of all violent crimes: this puts the approximate percentage of racially motivated “hate crimes” committed by White people against non-Whites at less than 1% of violent crimes.
  • It is estimated that about 40% of hate crimes are reported to the police, of which only about 8% were confirmed to actually have been “hate crimes.”
  • Blacks are more likely to commit racially motivated “hate crimes” than Whites.

These statistics prove that pro-White “lone wolf” violent crime is extremely rare: Based on the knowledge that “hate crimes” account for only 3% of all violent crimes alone, we can know that at best, pro-White “lone wolves” account for no more than 1% of all violent crimes—almost certainly substantially less.


Pro-White violent crime simply almost NEVER happens.

The Independent should be ashamed. This is not journalism. This is defamation, persecution, lies, deceit, and by their understanding, “racism.”  The truth is that White Nationalists and White Rights activists are NOT terrorists, in fact we are much more likely to be running from “anti-racist” terrorists than they are ever to be running from us.


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