>'White culture is under threat' is a core belief of white supremacists.
It's also a well known fact. All you have to do is look at the demographic changes in Western countries.
Wanting white culture to survive still doesn't make one a white supremacist. I even want Japanese culture to survive. Does this make me a Japanese supremacist?
> Wanting white culture to survive still doesn't make one a white supremacist.
You change the original point. Professing "white culture" is under threat and that other cultures should survive someplace else does indeed make you a white supremacist.
The U.S. was multi-cultural from the start, even if some cultures (natives or blacks) wanted nothing to do with it. This is what made it later stand out and attract people all over the world. You can't re-neg it without turning into a genocidal shithole.
Not too long ago many people in the US would have claimed that White Culture died the day the Irish, Italians or Polish started to be considered 'white'
I don't find statements like that particularly helpful.
It is fair to say that most organised attempts to advocate for 'White Culture' -such as White Pride events and a staggering proportion of 'European Students Associations' etc are explicitly racist in practice. This by itself should be concerning enough to lead observers to scrutinise very carefully organisations or publications devoted to securing 'White Culture'.
I don't think this is a moral question, but rather a question of reality. Black culture does not exist globally. Black culture of the United States does exist, because black people in the U.S. have a common history and common societal experience that binds them together.
White people are too diverse a group to have one single culture. I am white and not from the U.S. Based on these facts people cannot guess what my values are, what my traditions are, whether people of my ethnicity were ever opressed or were the opressors, or even what language I speak, or what religion I have. Hence the term "white culture" does not make sense.
Jesus often gets depicted to match the local population. In Korea, for example, he looks Asian.
The difference is that it's done for religious purposes, whereas an "educational historic video" like those made by BBC are expected to have different motives and standards of objectivity.
>he's literally proposing a conspiracy theory, based on an educational cartoon, for children, about the Roman empire
I'm not sure conspiracy is the right term, but it does seem like political propaganda from BBC, don't you think? How else would you explain the unrealistically "diverse" representations of history (the Roman period being just one of them as you can see in that other post)?
>so why are you blaming the US specifically and not any of the disparate partisan groups that directly built ISIS?
Perhaps because there are more US government supporters than ISIS supporters browsing this website?
And while it seems we pretty much all agree that ISIS are bad guys, not that many Americans appear to be bothered by the fact that the politicians they voted for are bombing other countries at will.
>chopping up humanity according to notions of supposed ethnicity is barbaric, and we're in the process of getting over it, even if some people will have to be dragged along.
I find your comment offensive and unsettling. My people were discriminated and persecuted because of their ethnicity. If things have gone worse we could have been wiped out of existence.
What you're basically saying is that it wouldn't be a big deal, because all people are interchangeable. Who cares if some ethnic group goes extinct, just replace them with someone else, because a human is a human, right?
It's also a well known fact. All you have to do is look at the demographic changes in Western countries.
Wanting white culture to survive still doesn't make one a white supremacist. I even want Japanese culture to survive. Does this make me a Japanese supremacist?