Good luck telling that to many in the USA. Show them literal blood feuds and tribal wars that have gone on for decades and regularly includes what would amount to war crimes between neighbouring African tribes and it will be flat out ignored because it goes against every "noble savage" or "homogenous" teamwork that so many retards keep trying to push.
I do. They don't seem to like it. Especially the Communists who are benefiting from racial division.
Then I tell them that their ethnicity is actually American. Well, not the Communists. Communists are only Communists. They're barely people. Typically it's the black MAGA supporters who go with me on that.
Don't worry, my campaign to make people accept American as an Ethnicity is actually going better than expected. The plurality of white Trump supporters, particularly white Trump supporters, identify as ethnically American in several of the battleground states. It's actually a leading demographic indicator of Trump support.
I don't think they count as a race or ethnicity. There's no such thing as "Brown" "Hispanic" or "Latino". You can't take 100% of the population south of the Rio Grande, and north of the Antarctic circle, and call it one race, ethnic group, or demographic.
What it does represent is a nicer form of "La Raza".
I've said it before, National Socialism and Fascism was popular with the West because it is the practical application of Socialism, even more practical than Fabian Socialism. We have already imported EFF style Black National Socialism, and we have already imported "Bronze" National Socialism as well.
I don't think its dumb. OP can correct me if I am wrong, but I think he is saying:
Celtic, Norman, Slavic, etc are all 'ethnic groups' that happen to be White. But a collection of "Whites" while all being of the same "race", they can be different ethnicity.
So there is no "White ethnic group", as within the White Grouping there are a multitude of ethnicity.
He's partially correct, but it's still a bad take, since he's just pushing his own narrative, as always. There are plenty of worse mistakes made here than talking about "ethnic whites," and yet this is what he feels the need to jump in on. I think that's what people get tired of.
It's also not the full story, and context is always important. You could argue that, in the American context, for example, "White" is an ethnicity. It's made up of subgroups, sure, but there's still a common language, nation, and generally birthplace.
But it's more his behavior than his argument that people are objecting to, I believe. I'm not saying he said this, but it does share some similarities to the tried and true "White people aren't real" nonsense. Call them whatever you want, but Hwites clearly are real, and there are clearly plenty of people who hate them. I'm suspicious of people who continually go out of their way to deflect from that, when it's clearly observable.
"Whites aren't an ethnic group, it's a racial group." No matter how you feel about that statement, or its accuracy...what's the motivation of saying it?
I don't follow users enough to know who has which leanings, which is good/bad. Bad, that I will always give the poster the benefit of the doubt, but good that I always take the post as just the post - and nothing more real or imagined.
FWIW, I come from a time when it was just accepted that this is the internet. There are no race, ethnic, religion, etc - Only ideas. That the idea, not the person, needs to be looked at, examined and discussed. If the idea is sound, then what difference does it make who is making the idea?
Now, having said that I don't follow people so he could be good, bad or worse but what he said is logically sound(IMO), and I say that as a pro-White person. Also, didn't he make the case that he feels the same way about black people, and that there can be no black ethnic state, for precisely the same reason. So it didn't sound (at least to me) that he was being unfair in his application of logic.
You are also correct in that whatever people feel about it, there are plenty of people that are showing their open hatred towards Whites, but that is pure jealousy and envy.
White, Black, Red, and Yellow are simply not ethnicities. It also fundamentally undermines the concept of a "white ethno-state". You can't have one. You have to have an ethnicity to focus on, even if that is an emergent ethnicity like "Boer", "Rhodesian", or "American". It's no different from saying, "I want an Asian ethno-state". That's not a thing.
If you're going by the archaic method, there's several more: Caucasoid, Negroid, Mongoloid, Orientaloid, Americanoid, and Australianoid(?).
That being said, those aren't based in biological reality, so you're going to have to accept them as political constructs, or use a different mechanism. But yeah, for sure, they ain't ethnicities.
Whites aren't an ethnic group, it's a racial group.
It's okay, blacks aren't an ethnic group either.
Good luck telling that to many in the USA. Show them literal blood feuds and tribal wars that have gone on for decades and regularly includes what would amount to war crimes between neighbouring African tribes and it will be flat out ignored because it goes against every "noble savage" or "homogenous" teamwork that so many retards keep trying to push.
I do. They don't seem to like it. Especially the Communists who are benefiting from racial division.
Then I tell them that their ethnicity is actually American. Well, not the Communists. Communists are only Communists. They're barely people. Typically it's the black MAGA supporters who go with me on that.
Don't worry, my campaign to make people accept American as an Ethnicity is actually going better than expected. The plurality of white Trump supporters, particularly white Trump supporters, identify as ethnically American in several of the battleground states. It's actually a leading demographic indicator of Trump support.
Him playing word games with definitions like this is a leftist tactic.
From my real life interactions with people? No.
This reminds me of don't tell Latinos that they're not a race. Even though they aren't.
I don't think they count as a race or ethnicity. There's no such thing as "Brown" "Hispanic" or "Latino". You can't take 100% of the population south of the Rio Grande, and north of the Antarctic circle, and call it one race, ethnic group, or demographic.
What it does represent is a nicer form of "La Raza".
I've said it before, National Socialism and Fascism was popular with the West because it is the practical application of Socialism, even more practical than Fabian Socialism. We have already imported EFF style Black National Socialism, and we have already imported "Bronze" National Socialism as well.
You have the dumbest takes.
He's protecting the Grift. Only jews get to be special whites.
He's one of the "special whites"
It gets a bit old...
I don't think its dumb. OP can correct me if I am wrong, but I think he is saying:
Celtic, Norman, Slavic, etc are all 'ethnic groups' that happen to be White. But a collection of "Whites" while all being of the same "race", they can be different ethnicity.
So there is no "White ethnic group", as within the White Grouping there are a multitude of ethnicity.
He's partially correct, but it's still a bad take, since he's just pushing his own narrative, as always. There are plenty of worse mistakes made here than talking about "ethnic whites," and yet this is what he feels the need to jump in on. I think that's what people get tired of.
It's also not the full story, and context is always important. You could argue that, in the American context, for example, "White" is an ethnicity. It's made up of subgroups, sure, but there's still a common language, nation, and generally birthplace.
But it's more his behavior than his argument that people are objecting to, I believe. I'm not saying he said this, but it does share some similarities to the tried and true "White people aren't real" nonsense. Call them whatever you want, but Hwites clearly are real, and there are clearly plenty of people who hate them. I'm suspicious of people who continually go out of their way to deflect from that, when it's clearly observable.
"Whites aren't an ethnic group, it's a racial group." No matter how you feel about that statement, or its accuracy...what's the motivation of saying it?
Thanks for the thoughtful reply.
I don't follow users enough to know who has which leanings, which is good/bad. Bad, that I will always give the poster the benefit of the doubt, but good that I always take the post as just the post - and nothing more real or imagined.
FWIW, I come from a time when it was just accepted that this is the internet. There are no race, ethnic, religion, etc - Only ideas. That the idea, not the person, needs to be looked at, examined and discussed. If the idea is sound, then what difference does it make who is making the idea?
Now, having said that I don't follow people so he could be good, bad or worse but what he said is logically sound(IMO), and I say that as a pro-White person. Also, didn't he make the case that he feels the same way about black people, and that there can be no black ethnic state, for precisely the same reason. So it didn't sound (at least to me) that he was being unfair in his application of logic.
You are also correct in that whatever people feel about it, there are plenty of people that are showing their open hatred towards Whites, but that is pure jealousy and envy.
You're correct, they just don't like it.
White, Black, Red, and Yellow are simply not ethnicities. It also fundamentally undermines the concept of a "white ethno-state". You can't have one. You have to have an ethnicity to focus on, even if that is an emergent ethnicity like "Boer", "Rhodesian", or "American". It's no different from saying, "I want an Asian ethno-state". That's not a thing.
America is too big to have a single ethnicity. New Englander and Appalachian are separate ethnicities, for example.
Cool opinion bro, I'll let you know when I give a shit about it.
I like how they get mad at the truth because they don't think it's beneficial.
You, sir. Have just defined "malinformation". Which the Biden admin attempted to regulate.
Oy vey
Right on schedule.
3 races, Caucasoid, Negroid, Mongoloid
Most people don't recognize the difference between race and ethnicity
Sorry you got downvote raped
If you're going by the archaic method, there's several more: Caucasoid, Negroid, Mongoloid, Orientaloid, Americanoid, and Australianoid(?).
That being said, those aren't based in biological reality, so you're going to have to accept them as political constructs, or use a different mechanism. But yeah, for sure, they ain't ethnicities.