Realitybites said:
Mothra said:
For the record, I was referring to the party of Nick Fuentes, an avowed white supremacist and anti-semite. Republicans don't need to become that, despite your buddy's belief to the contrary.
The GOP absolutely needs to be an Anglophile party, defend the faith, the language, the culture, and the institutions built by that heritage...and only let people in to the United States who are willing to do the same. There needs to be an absolute ban on Muslim immigration, for instance. Somalis and Haitians have to go back to the cesspools from which they came. That level of cultural incompatibility cannot be allowed to stand.
Legal immigrants of all backgrounds came here knowing that this was a nation and culture built by Anglo-Saxons. They didn't sign up for the mongolian hoarde that has poured over our southern border and destabilized the nation, nor for the H1B scam that is taking the jobs of their children.
Quote:
As for your question, there are plenty of writings - in particular Nazi propaganda - that lead to the conclusion that the Nazis did in fact consider the Aryan race (a smaller subset of the white race, Germanic in background) superior to other races. This is pretty much undisputed.
Aryan race, yes. But you missed the broader point. There is no "white" race. Their definition of Aryan was much more nuanced than your imprecise categories. They were anti-semitic in a very literal sense, having contempt for both Jewish and Muslim semites alike, yet admitting brown Aryans fully to their society.
Anglophile and white supremacist are two very different things, wouldn't you agree? If you understood my comments to mean I don't believe Republicans need to defend the faith, culture, language and institutions by by that heritage, then it appears you are largely unfamiliar with my views, as espoused on this board the last 20 plus years, or are once again (as you so often do) reading something into my comments I did not suggest, and certainly didn't say. I've been one of the biggest proponents of same since I first joined Baylorfans back in 99 - while you were likely still in diapers.
When I reference white supremacy, I reference the beliefs of Nick Fuentes, who until he's started tempering his beliefs somewhat over the course of the last few months as he's gone more mainstream, has been a huge proponent that the white race (a term he generally uses, not me) is supreme to others. You are perhaps largely unfamiliar with some of the things he's said about "white" people as a monolithic group. I would suggest you do a little investigation. Just for the record, this is the same dude who is against interracial marriage, and has been very critical of JD Vance's marriage.
As I said above, if Republicans want to win elections, they are going to have to find a way to connect with non-whites on the values that we share, sorta like Trump and MAGA did, not promote the white grievance culture of Nick Fuentes, which is a losing strategy any way you slice it. As I said above, Trump didn't win because he made the Republican Party smaller.
As for your comments about the white race, I get that you are wanting to quibble about the term "white," a term Nick Fuentes uses to describe white-colored people. But I am still trying to figure out the relevance of your comments. Why are you bringing up the German definition of "Aryan"? In fact, why are you bringing up Germany at all? Are you once again assuming I said or suggested something I did not?
Again, when I used the term "white" I was using that term as Nick Fuentes does. Ironically, he's of Hispanic heritage but considers himself "white." In other words, he, like a lot of people, is using that term broadly to describe people that have white skin. He's not referring to any specific heritage. So if you have a problem with a "lack of precision," your problem appears to be with Fuentes and not me, as I've offered no opinion on the subject.
As for the term "Aryan." we can quibble, but certainly your position is flatly wrong and uninformed. I'd suggest doing some research on how Nazi propaganda described the term, as it most definitely was referring to a white skinned and of a Germanic background, and not people who adhered to a certain set of beliefs.
But again, that topic is completely irrelevant to any point I've made, and also completely off topic on this thread. I'd suggest if you want to argue semantics, then start your own thread on the subject. Let's try to stick to the topic at hand, and not litter the thread with your trademark inane and irrelevant points.
?v=1674680679&width=800