Anonymous
(ID: V4oJGH5f)
10/24/2025, 12:33:57 PM
No.519684939
[Report]
>>519685348
>>519685509
>>519686092
10/24/2025, 12:33:57 PM
No.519684939
[Report]
>>519685348
>>519685509
>>519686092
How to BTFO /pol/:
One of the most glaring flaws in white nationalism is its sheer incoherence. At its core, the ideology crumbles because no two white nationalists can even agree on what "white" actually means. Definitions shift like sand, exposing the whole thing as a house of cards built on pseudoscience .
Take racial classifications: The longest-running system, dating back to the 18th century, divided humanity into Caucasian, Mongoloid, and Negroid. Under this, many Indians qualify as Caucasian due to shared Indo-European roots and anthropological traits. Yet white nationalists routinely discriminate against them, labeling them "non-white" based on skin tone or culture rather than any consistent biology.
Then there's the treatment of Middle Easterners. By virtually every physical and genetic definition, many fit the "white" mold—fair skin, European-like features, even red hair among some groups. Historical figures from these regions were once embraced as part of the "Aryan" myth peddled by early racists. But today? They're often vilified solely for religion or geography, proving "whiteness" is less about race and more about cultural exclusion.
History drives this home even harder. In the U.S. and Europe, groups now universally seen as white—Irish immigrants derided as "papists" and subhuman in the 19th century, Italians stereotyped as swarthy criminals during early 20th-century waves, or Serbs and other Slavs dismissed as inferior during World Wars. "Whiteness" expanded over time not through logic, but through social convenience and power dynamics. Yesterday's outcasts become today's insiders, revealing how fabricated the category truly is.
The white nationalist fantasy of a racially homogeneous society is as delusional as a communist utopia. Both ignore human complexity in favor of rigid ideals that never hold up in reality. It's chasing a purity that doesn't exist and never has. If "white" can't even be defined without contradiction, how can an entire ideology stand on it?
Take racial classifications: The longest-running system, dating back to the 18th century, divided humanity into Caucasian, Mongoloid, and Negroid. Under this, many Indians qualify as Caucasian due to shared Indo-European roots and anthropological traits. Yet white nationalists routinely discriminate against them, labeling them "non-white" based on skin tone or culture rather than any consistent biology.
Then there's the treatment of Middle Easterners. By virtually every physical and genetic definition, many fit the "white" mold—fair skin, European-like features, even red hair among some groups. Historical figures from these regions were once embraced as part of the "Aryan" myth peddled by early racists. But today? They're often vilified solely for religion or geography, proving "whiteness" is less about race and more about cultural exclusion.
History drives this home even harder. In the U.S. and Europe, groups now universally seen as white—Irish immigrants derided as "papists" and subhuman in the 19th century, Italians stereotyped as swarthy criminals during early 20th-century waves, or Serbs and other Slavs dismissed as inferior during World Wars. "Whiteness" expanded over time not through logic, but through social convenience and power dynamics. Yesterday's outcasts become today's insiders, revealing how fabricated the category truly is.
The white nationalist fantasy of a racially homogeneous society is as delusional as a communist utopia. Both ignore human complexity in favor of rigid ideals that never hold up in reality. It's chasing a purity that doesn't exist and never has. If "white" can't even be defined without contradiction, how can an entire ideology stand on it?
