I have noticed a great deal of confusion lately about the terminology to use when referring to the White Rights movement. In particular, as always, there seems to be a lot of confusion about the difference between a White Nationalist and a White supremacist. Some insist on conflating the two. It is particularly alarming when this confusion starts finding its way into the alt-right itself. Some people on the more libertarian wing of the movement, shockingly, don’t even seem to know that White Nationalism is a movement for White rights (no, a White Nationalist is not merely someone who is White and a Nationalist. . .White Nationalism is a racial identity movement for White people)
The White Rights Movement is not a single, ideologically monolithic community. Feminists are fond of pointing out that there are different strains of feminism, likewise with other ideological movements on the left. The same is true for the White Rights movement. We are a large group of people who have converged on a central understanding that our White identity is of inestimable importance in our lives and who wish to advocate for the collective interests of White people, and who know that race is biologically real and likewise important in our lives. But beyond that, we split into multiple strains of thought.
So, in the interest of making the White Rights movement better understood here is a breakdown of the major strains of thought within the pro-White movement. Hopefully this can clear some things up for anyone who is confused about our movement:
The White Rights Movement in Context:
The White Rights Movement is a racial identity movement just like the movements that exist for Non-Whites. Like non-White racial movements, it seeks to advocate for the interests of a racial group, and brings the members of that race together to stand up for policies and principles that are important to them and their racial identity. For us, that is the White race, and the people we are advocating for are White people worldwide. That is the primary interest of the White Rights movement: White people helping other White people.
Because of the power of melanosupremacy in society the White community’s rights and interests align strongly with racialism as a worldview (i.e. that the races are biologically different and race is important). For reasons related to the way equalitarian doctrine is used to put White people down, any true White rights movement cannot support equalitarianism.
This situation has lead to a convergence where promotion of White interests and a racialist/race-realist worldview converge in the movement. Thus, the White Rights movement is founded on two bedrock principles: White racial-identity advocacy, and racialism.
Racialism and Racial Advocacy:
The White Rights movement is a racialist movement. What that means is simply that we (1) believe that race is a biological reality and (2) that race is important in our lives and in society at large. Nothing more. Another similar term you will hear is race realism, which most of the time, means the same thing as racialism: someone who believes the races are biologically different from each other in some way, shape, or form.
Since the Pro-White movement is a racialist movement, our view of race is in direct conflict with the view of race promulgated by the left, which claims that the concept of race is important in life and society, but that it is a social construct, with no basis in biology. Such people are anti-racialists, and in practice are almost always equalitarians and melanosupremacists.
The White Rights movement is also about racial advocacy—in our case, White racial advocacy. This means we think that race is of critical importance to society, and that we are advocating for racialist ideals in the public and policy sphere, and most importantly, for the rights and interests of a particular racial group (White people). We advocate for White identity.
The White Rights Movement:
The movement itself may be referred to differently by different people. I prefer to use the term White Rights Movement. Some may call it the White Identity Movement, the White Nationalist Movement, or simply the Pro-White movement. As a general rule, all these terms mean pretty much the same thing.
As just stated, the WRM is a racial advocacy movement, but this does not mean that there is a single strain of White Rights advocacy. First, I’ll try to sum up the things the movement as a whole can agree on and stands for:
The Core Positions:
A White Rights advocate is someone who advocates for the rights and interests of the White community worldwide. This means that the White Rights movement is inherently an identity movement. We are fighting to defend and celebrate White identity.
The White Rights Movement (WRM) also recognizes that the White community is under sustained cultural and governmental attack today, and that the mechanism for this attack is an anti-White ideology that pushes unscientific and unethical notions of equality, and that shames and condemns White people as evil villains if they stand up for their own racial interests.
Although different White advocates have different views on what the precise tenants of this anti-White ideology are, how it functions to hurt White people, how it got here, and who is responsible for promoting it (and of course, different terms are used to speak about it), it seems fair to say that any White advocate would agree that such an ideology, broadly outlined as above, exists, and is the major enemy of White rights today.
Some particular positions which have broad consensus throughout the movement, and across various strains of White advocacy:
No White-Genocide: Non-White immigration to White majority countries must be stopped, and non-Whites in White majority countries (particularly in our European homelands) must be deported back to their respective racial homelands.
No Diversity: Multiculturalism (more aptly understood as multiracialism) does not work and diversity is not a strength. It destroys societies, and breeds violence and conflict. It is also used as a tool of anti-White hatred to force White people to give up our rights and give up our spaces to other races.
White Pride Worldwide: White people must be able to freely celebrate their White identity and advocate for their racial interests, without fear of violence, intimidation, or character assassination. We must achieve a culture where White pride and advocacy is accepted as healthy and normal, much like other races are encouraged to have racial pride and to advocate their racial interests.
No Anti-Discrimination Norms: Racial Discrimination is not immoral, and is in fact Natural and healthy. People should discriminate in favor of their own race, and this should be legal and socially applauded.
No Interracial Sex: Racial hybridization/miscegenation/race mixing is immoral and destroys racial identities and ultimately whole races. It should not be legal, and should be culturally discouraged.
White Nationalism v White Supremacism:
White Nationalism and White Supremacism are NOT the same thing. For anyone wanting to know what the difference is between the two, here is the explanation:
A White Nationalist is a White Rights advocate who advocates racial separatism. Racial separatism is the understanding that people are happier and races survive and thrive, only when they are in a racially homogenous social and/or national environment. For the movement generally, this most often takes the form of advocating for all White countries/nation-states.
White Nationalism is one of the major engines behind the WRM’s opposition to non-White immigration and multiculturalism. Non-White immigration into White majority countries, even in White homelands such as Europe, is bringing about an effective White genocide by mass population replacement. One of the most frequently repeated statements of our movement is the well known White genocide memes like the one below, which point out the need for racial separatism:
In my experience, there is almost no such thing as a White rights advocate who is not a White Nationalist. While I have run into them on occasion, they are few and far between. White Nationalists are the majority of the movement, and I often use the terms “White Nationalist” and “White Rights advocate” interchangeably.
This is what melanosupremacists want to portray the whole movement as.
A White supremacist is just a racial supremacist like the myriads of non-White racial supremacists that these same people love so much, and in fact, usually are (because melanosupremacy is by definition a belief in non-White supremacy over Whites).
Although in my experience, actual White supremacists make up a small percentage of the White Rights/White Nationalist movement, there are some racial supremacists in the movement. White supremacists are not different ideologically than supremacists of any other race (for example, Black supremacists like the Nation of Islam or Black Hebrew Movement, or from melanosupremacists like equalitarians).
The vast majority of them have what I call a modern supremacist view, which is compatible with White Nationalism. The tiny fraction with what might be termed the “old school” view are not White Nationalists at all:
Old School Racial Supremacy (non-White Nationalist):
In some prior eras the view that a superior race must conquer, colonize, and rule over inferior races was not particularly uncommon, but I have run into only one proponent of this view in my entire time in the movement.
The understanding, backed up by science, that racially homogenous societies are in the best interests of every race is so pervasive throughout the movement that this view is pretty much intolerable. It is incompatible with racial separatism/racial nationalism, the prevailing and strongly held view of the vast majority of the movement. It is so rare it is almost not worth mentioning.
Thus the “textbook definition” of White supremacy is more or less nonexistent in the movement.
Modern White Supremacy:
The type of White supremacy that I have encountered most frequently (and again, they are a minority in the movement), is a doctrine of racial supremacy that does not include social supremacy (i.e. ruling over other races). Instead, these supremacists are as happy as the rest of the movement to live and let live with other races, and are aiming to achieve racially homogenous countries again. They are racial supremacists in the sense that they do believe that a race (in this case Whites) is superior to other races. Typically, they hold that Whites are superior in “creative genius” and civilization building, as well as moral sensibilities. They not infrequently also are happy to admit that Asians have superior IQ scores.
To summarize. . .
White Nationalism: White advocacy (the promotion of White racial interests) + racial separatism (the belief in, and promotion of, racially homogenous societies and/or countries). So, White Nationalism is the promotion of White racial interests along with the belief that racial separatism is in White people’s best interest, and on those grounds, it seeks to achieve White, racially homogenous societies and/or countries.
White Supremacism: a belief in racial supremacism (the belief that one race is superior to others), with regard to Whites. Thus, a White supremacist is someone who believes that Whites are superior in some way to other races. Any supremacist who is a part of the White Rights movement also advocates for White interests, but take note of the fact that one does not necessarily have to be any sort of White rights advocate to be a supremacist, and such people do exist.
Because the belief in racially homogenous societies or countries is not necessarily logically inconsistent with modern racial supremacist doctrines (i.e. those that don’t include a component of ruling over other races) it is possible to hold both views at the same time.
However, in my experience the vast majority of White Nationalists are not White supremacists, although most White supremacists are White Nationalists. While this state of things may explain some of the confusion, there is still no excuse for not seeing the distinction: the two beliefs are certainly fundamentally distinct from each other. Being one does not make you the other, and the two terms are not interchangeable.
Various strains of modern National Socialism (disparagingly dubbed “neo-nazism” by the press) exist.
These are completely independent and distinct from the White Rights movement and pro-White advocacy. They are absolutely not interchangeable.
National Socialism is not a racialist ideology in the sense we have defined it here. Nor is it inherently pro-White at all. Rather, it is (as its name suggests) a political philosophy much like communism, classical liberal republicanism/democracy, etc. All socialism, including National socialism, is really a philosophy of the left. Someone with any racial belief can be a National Socialist. Someone of any race can be a National Socialist. And in fact, there are National Socialist parties currently active in multiple non-White countries. National Socialism usually involves some notion of nationalism (often ethnic) and authoritarianism or totalitarianism, and of course socialism. It has no inherent connection to White Rights advocacy.
White Nationalism and National Socialism cannot be conflated. They are apples to oranges and not at all the same thing.
That being said, there are certainly some high profile people in the pro-White movement who also promote National Socialism. These people simply hold both views out of choice, not because National Socialism is inherently connected to the movement.
Plenty of White Nationalists, like myself, loath National Socialism, and wish it would just go away. Certainly, many White advocates I have run into are not National Socialists and want nothing to do with the anti-democracy dogma and Hitler worship that so often plagues National Socialist circles.
The bottom line is this: White Nationalism and National Socialism are two very different and distinct things. Although the ranks of the two sometimes overlap, they are by no means synonymous.