The Washington Post has a scary story:
Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.), the House majority whip, acknowledged Monday that he spoke at a gathering hosted by white-supremacist leaders while serving as a state representative in 2002, thrusting a racial controversy into House Republican ranks days before the party assumes control of both congressional chambers.
Scalise, 49, who ascended to the House GOP’s third-ranking post this year, confirmed through an adviser that he once appeared at a convention of the European-American Unity and Rights Organization, or EURO. But the adviser said the congressman didn’t know at the time about the group’s affiliation with racists and neo-Nazi activists.
“For anyone to suggest that I was involved with a group like that is insulting and ludicrous,” Scalise told the Times-Picayune on Monday night. The organization, founded by former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, has been called a hate group by several civil rights organizations.
What do these white supremacists believe they are supreme at? These articles never say. They just throw around the slur “white supremacist.” I am well acquainted with all of the leaders of what the MSM call “white supremacy” and none of them are white supremacists. What they are is the white equivalent of Zionists. They want a homeland for their people so they can work out their destiny for themselves without interference from outsiders. When Jews establish their own country, that’s a wonderful thing, but when whites try to do the same thing, that’s evil.
And what do these “white supremacists” believe whites are supreme at? Playing cornerback? There hasn’t been a starting white cornerback in the NFL since Jason Sehorn with the New York Giants. I can’t remember the last starting white tailback in the NFL. There are many areas of life where “white supremacists” would have no problem admitting whites are not supreme at.
I actually think “White Supremacist” is not bad semantically. White supremacy, in the sense of a society in which key decisions are made by white Europeans, is one of the better arrangements History has come up with. There have of course been some blots on the record, but I don`t see how it can be denied that net-net, white Europeans have made a better job of running fair and stable societies than has any other group.
Even non-whites acknowledge this in unguarded moments: this Zimbabwean blogger, for example, or the American high school student in this exchange with his teacher:
“One day I asked the bored, black faces staring back at me: “What would happen if all the white people in America disappeared tomorrow?”
“We screwed,” a young, pitch-black boy screamed back. The rest of the blacks laughed.[ A White Teacher Speaks Out, American Renaissance, July 2009]”
Non-white supremacy is after all the rule over much of the world, from entire continental spaces like sub-Saharan Africa to individual black-run or mestizo-run municipalities in the U.S.A. I see no great floods into these places by refugees desperate to escape the horrors of white supremacy.
We should not let our enemies dictate vocabulary to us, though. In any case, the Whatever Right contains many separatists—who, far from wanting to lord it over nonwhites, just want to get away from them.
No, “White Supremacist” really won`t do, even in an owning-the-insult spirit.
“White Nationalist,” which has a fairly healthy currency here on the Whadda-We-Call-Ourselves Right, strikes me as even more problematical. What is the nation to which “nationalist” is the referent? “White” isn`t a nation, nor likely to become one.
