I don't think I even gave any evidence in your quote. — Judaka

Correct. Hence why I wrote "the supposed evidence you give of it after the post above"

The problem with the alt-right(what does that even mean?), is that they have decided that all their problems exist because of the actions of someone else. Nothing ever got solved in this world by demanding others to change. Attention is the only currency in this case. As a person the only thing I can do with a group such as the "alt right" is ignore them. They are trying to ruffle feathers, get under skin. That is their ONLY goal. Attention. I understand this is not easy to do. But unless they have real power of some sort such as boss or government who cares. Discrimination is another form of fear. There are many groups to put someone into and give excuse to discriminate but its is fear that causes the action. All I can do as a white or a black person these days to stop racism is to not be scared of the other person. It is not just race that causes fear from others. It is just a quickly recognizable difference.

term “race” used in this manner has literally no genetic grounding — I like sushi

. Blacks in american history were no questionably done wrong. So have the ancestors of all others as well. We have to not allow ourselves to be scared. That goes for anyone. We have to be able no matter the color to trust that others are good even if there are not. If crimes are being committed you must speak out. This is the same problem with religion. As soon as it is used to look for any thing else other than self teaching or practice than it immediately becomes harmful. There should be no debate if religion is real or not because it doesn't matter to anything but yourself. It is also meant to help you the individual. Not to give reason to fear or hate anything or anyone. To live in a free society we have to take many risks. But we should not have to worry about our safety in modern society to the point we let others commit crimes whether on the receiving or giving end of them. Fear is hard to overcome and so is judgement. So all that can be done is trust in oneself unless you feel you have done wrong, but is still trust in oneself. We have all been trained to think everything is going to go wrong and to place blame on everything. There should only be two crimes that need re-movement from society which are physical violence and abuse of power. All other small crimes could be dealt with in a better more beneficial for all way. But past that, how we let thing affect us, is up to us. Trust is hard. If we do it may help all but it will for sure help yourself. But the alt right will never go to Charleston if they thought that people would literally ignore them at all levels. They weren't marching for there own health benefits. And I am not talking about the media. Wouldn't it be great if would have turned on the tv that day and seen the media showing pictures of a bunch a racist walking around by themselves? Not only that, It is the only thing that can stop it. Now if they commit crimes then give them attention enough to remove them but any group that announces ahead of time when and were they will be and we clearly no their agenda, then it is our fault for caring what those idiots are doing much less go fight with them. Only thing we can control is how we handle the situation. We can't change the situation, but somehow, the way we react to it can reduce the "currency" they are receiving for it. .

. Hence the idea that Europeans invaded Africa and fought there just indigenous tribes is either an ignorant or a condescending view or both. — ssu

I'm talking about the actual British, Portuguese, and other European influences in the countries of Africa. I'm referring to people involved in the Trans-Atlantic slave trade stop deflecting. How about reading this

https://jspp.psychopen.eu/article/view/143/139

You disagree Anglo-Saxon whites are sensitive to interpretations based on ethnicity or that other ethnicities/races aren't sensitive to it? — Judaka

I disagree with the whole notion you presented with the alt-right. The alt-right are fear mongering cowards who are pandering to the idea that whites are in danger of being replaced due to low birth rate and the evolution of progressivism. The point is the alt-right wants to maintain white superiority, period...

As for your other comments, a lot of people are criticising you for being historically inaccurate — Judaka

A lot of people aren't criticizing me. I just informed an individual on what I was referring to, next!

I have a problem with you claiming that whites are responsible for things that happened before their lifetime purely because they're white. — Judaka

I never said that, how about quote me specifically on exactly where I said that.....

This idea of ethnic history is a huge problem in so far as negating the interpretative relevance of race, not to mention it doesn't make much sense to blame individuals for the actions of groups they belong to. — Judaka

If you say so, but historical facts speak for themselves.

So either you're blaming people who have been dead for a long time or you're blaming people for crimes on the basis of their ethnic heritage. — Judaka

I never specified a blame. How about stop jumping the gun and falsely interpret what I said and actually quote what I said. I gave an overall historical account why the alt-right is a fringe group that is not accepted. As far as I see it, its a bunch of whiny white dudes complaining about other people regarding multiculturalism and claiming other groups need safe spaces yet tout the idea of segregation because they want their own safe space themselves, sounds like a hypocritical band of nut jobs.

What I am saying is that there are a lot of similarities between the east Asian countries trying to maintain ethnic hegemony and what the alt-right want, similarities between the alt-right wanting whites to be prioritised in "white" countries over non-whites in the same way that governments across the world prioritise their majority races. — Judaka

The alt-right want the United States to go back to being a "white country" ergo, they want whites to go back to having all benefits and maintaining the privileges. This is why they marched on the college campus stating "jews will not replace us." The alt-right feel the Jews economically and socially are influencing society replacing their control over society. I don't even know what a "white country" is anymore. The United States will never be a white country and by 2040 whites will be the minority in the United States. If the alt-right is so concerned perhaps they need to go back to Europe and start their utopia there.

I was thinking more along the lines of what happened in Brasil. Most people remain oblivious to the utterly vile chapter of human history and focus being taken away by slavery in the US - I assume you know about the wholesale slaughter I’m talking about and why the “Tiger Coast” is called the tiger coast. — I like sushi

All in all, my point of reference was in regards to the psychological affect of European colonial influence. I'm not interested in revisiting history, I'm more concerned about how people of color over this planet saw themselves after they've been influenced by European colonialism, from the Indians to the Africans to the South Americans.

was referring to the “sigh” and my assumed ignorance — I like sushi

No. But it seems common place that when I'm actually explaining the direct issue and giving a historical background all the responses are far left going way back in history. This gives me the impression many of you aren't really familiar with African diaspora and how European colonialism played a part in the causality of what we are currently discussing. This redirection of yours is basically going to lead us into the "whataboutism."

Black-skinned Americans in my view, should be taking responsibility for slavery just as much as a white person should, why? Because ostensibly they're both Americans and they're both living in the extension of the culture that practised slavery. — Judaka

I disagree with a lot of things you've said in this thread and others, but none more than this. Maybe, maybe, you could make this outrageous statement and expect to be taken seriously if black people were treated with the respect and given the opportunities they deserve.

A few months ago, I started a very angry discussion when I said that white people don't like black people. They don't trust them or feel comfortable with them. Whether or not you believe that's true, in my experience many black people do. To me it's obvious, although I recognize to others it is not. Until that changes, saying black people are responsible for slavery is, as I said, outrageous.

Okay, why did you bring up that racial intolerance in South America and Africa are the fault of European colonialism? You're telling me that you had no intentions of blaming any group for this?

The historical facts do not speak for themselves, you've interpreted their meaning and you've interpreted that individuals should be held accountable for the actions of people of a similar race or ancestry. I would have no problems calling this racism.

As for your views about the alt-right, you aren't really making an effort, I don't want to talk about them with you.


Yeah sorry, I don't know what the "the post above" refers to.


Yes, it's very clear that you and I come from very different perspectives. First of all, I don't really believe that either white or black people should be taking responsibility for slavery, the people who perpetuated and practised it are long dead. If you think that as Americans, who are the continuation of a culture that practised slavery, you should be taking some form of responsibility for that (not seeing yourself as responsible, big difference) then it shouldn't be on the basis of your skin colour but because you are an American.

If you would argue that white Americans should be taking responsibility for slavery but black people should consider themselves (as a group) victims of it then where does that kind of mentality stop? It's madness. You promote viewing things through a racial lens, you promote interpretations based on race, who are you helping?

If we've got problems in society then let's fix them for all citizens of the country, not taking their race into account at all, that's what a non-racist country would look like. The problem is that people just keep trying to racialise everything until a white American and a black American are distinct and separate things. That opens the door to all kinds of problems.

I want to reduce the interpretative relevance of race, for me, that means prioritising individual characteristic to inform yourself and form opinions about people rather than the groups they belong to. You can't do that while also piling on the ways people should think about things based on their race and the races of others.

To reiterate, I absolutely did not say black people were responsible for slavery, especially the black people who actually were slaves, that would have been an outrageous comment but it's not what I said.

If you would argue that white Americans should be taking responsibility for slavery but black people should consider themselves (as a group) victims of it then where does that kind of mentality stop? It's madness. You promote viewing things through a racial lens, you promote interpretations based on race, who are you helping? — Judaka

American society and its people already see things through a racial lens. You can't just wave a rhetorical wand and make that go away. The consequences hurt black people much more than they do white people.

If we've got problems in society then let's fix them for all citizens of the country, not taking their race into account at all, that's what a non-racist country would look like. The problem is that people just keep trying to racialise everything until a white American and a black American are distinct and separate things. That opens the door to all kinds of problems. — Judaka

The problem with that is that fixing the problems "for all citizens of the country" will never happen until people acknowledge the way things are.

I want to reduce the interpretative relevance of race, — Judaka

Again, you're waving the rhetorical wand.

We are without power and all I can do is aim to be the change I want to see in the world. Black people are just people with real problems, I hope those with the ability to reduce or fix those problems will do so, be they bodies of people or individuals. I hope people will individually limit the interpretative relevance they put into race and convince others to follow suit or condemn those who refuse to do so.

That's what I am doing now, imploring you to stop thinking in such racialised terms and see people as individuals and condemn you when you don't. It may not make much difference but I will do my part nonetheless.

That's what I am doing now, imploring you to stop thinking in such racialised terms and see people as individuals and condemn you when you don't. It may not make much difference but I will do my part nonetheless. — Judaka

As I said, in my opinion you can't make a credible effort to meet your goal unless you take into account racial conditions as they are now.

You misquoted.

I only wrote this line of the text you quoted:

term “race” used in this manner has literally no genetic grounding

If you made a list of problems for a race, I would rewrite the list as problems for citizens in America and then we would proceed to come up with solutions as best we could. If you gave specific examples of problems for people of a particular ethnicity, I would treat them as problems that a specific individual went through. As for things like racism, there are racist individuals and victims of racism but they're still all individuals.

You want racism to disappear while maintaining a racially motivated outlook but it goes against common sense. A lot of what you're saying literally only makes sense when looking at it from a racialised lens, when you treat poor black people as just poor people and black victims of police brutality as just victims of police brutality, things change dramatically, it can't be avoided. The problems of the race become the problems of the people.

The problems of the race become the problems of the people. — Judaka

But black people are often targeted by police BECAUSE they are black (see the official police policy in Ferguson, Missouri). It isn’t a problem for white people. Black people are targeted because they are perceived to belong to a group, which they indeed do belong to as a descriptive fact of society. Human brains group into categories. That’s evolution. You’re never going to completely do away with that. Also, what does your language including the terms “black people” and “white people” say about your brain?

I disagree with the way you've framed the topic to begin with. — Judaka

You do realize you do this a lot? Someone tries to bring in a different perspective, widen the scope of your inquiry, and see the problem you're presenting from a wider, different angle, and you shoot them down because.... you can't wrap your head around it? You're too stubborn? You have a certain answer in mind that you want to drive home and you're not actually interesting in honest inquiry? In any case, not good philosophizing.

You're looking to explain things in racially motivated terms which may or may not actually be relevant to explaining something like the representation in statistics of various subjects. — Judaka

Nope. I'm explaining the difference between the Alt-Right and the rest of white culture and why the AR and Nazis are vilified and not just seen as the equivalent of black/asian/hispanic/whatever pride.

Ethnicity to me is the most visible way to interpret differences between people, it's also the least subjective and the most simple. — Judaka

That's a load of horse manure. And that view of the world is in direct contradiction to this statement:

When I tell you I'm white, you've got a whole story for me don't you? You've got so much to say, you could write a small paper on it. Well, I don't like that. I seek to discredit your way of thinking, I won't contend with it by using your fixation on race. — Judaka

And this one.

If you can point out a particular example of racism then we're on the same team, I don't like any example of people using race to inform themselves about people. I will not deal with your race fixation, that's exactly what I'm challenging in this thread. — Judaka

Furthermore, I never said anything about using race to inform myself about anyone.
My specific argument is that white culture is seen as the normal culture, the "mainstream" culture, and thus we don't need any little sub-groups purporting to stand proudly for whites. Thus, anyone who does is suspicious.

Scratch some Alt-Right nut-job who says he just cares about pride in his own race, and you got a raving, racist lunatic who firmly agrees with the Endlösung.

All good. I’m only posted on this thread to see where Judaka was trying to take it. I think everyone appreciates the history of happened in the americas and how Africa was used - although I wish more knew about Brasil and the horrors that happened there.

Of course today the US takes the limelight fro obvious reasons (being the new global influence and therefore the main cultural drive).

It does seem that Judaka is attempting to put forward the possibility that some people who are called “alt-right”, and who may have called themselves “alt-right”, weren’t necessarily “racist”. I think there is some truth to this, yet if they still go around saying they are “alt-right” then they’re either oblivious as to what the term means now and how it doesn’t mean what they thought it did.

By this I simply mean that “right leaning” doesn’t mean “racist” anymore than “left leaning” does. Without a doubt today the “alt-right” are strongly tied to “white supremacy” (and it is possible that many find this to be a perversion of the original intent; if it wasn’t racist, but more about some protection of there culture).

As pointed out previously by someone the term “culture” is a difficult one unwrap. Across the globe cultures are shifting due to the homogenous nature the internet and global communications are bringing. It is not massively surprising to find people worrying about their sense of “identity” and I can appreciate that many Africans displaced unwilllingly in the colonial period had a hell of a time, if they survived.

What bothers me today is ease with which the term “race” is miscontrued to suit either some genetic argument or some cultural argument. I don’t see a way around this unfortunately as the confusion has become so embedded in colloquial speech that too many never givenit a second thought. My worry is that some trying to do good will unwittingly convey the wrong kind of message about “race”.

Yeah sorry, I don't know what the "the post above" refers to. — Judaka

The post of yours that I quoted in that reply.

The big one you're being extremely guilty of and that's ethnic histories, whereby because you're white and because someone else is black, there's a three-hundred-year-old story for the both of us that paints us as enemies. — Judaka

That is not what I said. I replied to your following comment:

"I don't like to talk about ethnicities as being interpretatively relevant but apart from individualists, the only ethnicity by and large that tries to ignore their ethnicity are Anglo-Saxon whites."

My reference to the "default" sense of humanity conferred to Anglo-saxons was to point out one way such "ignoring" is not what it seems. I should have emphasized that your observation regarding ethnicity is factually wrong when one considers the resistance to integration in education and the work place.

Can a black-skinned American think back to the origins of Western culture and associate with it despite the difference in ethnic heritage? — Judaka

They weren't given much of a choice in that regard since they were stripped of all that belonged to them.
Buchanan is cool with them as long as they do not overturn white supremacy. The replacements he worries about come from cultures that haven't been integrated into society as partial citizens.

So I keep talking about interpretative relevance in this thread and what I mean is that something with interpretative relevance is something we draw meaning from. So if we put someone in a room with four other guys, what might they say? Two black guys and two white guys? Two noisy guys and two quiet guys? Three tall guys and one short guy? And then you ask well what do those things mean and for someone, it might be like "well, I can't stand noisy people so I wouldn't want to interact with the noisy ones".

It's not as if I am ignorant of race or ethnicity, I have just worked through what it means for that person to be that race until I had nothing of note to say. I want to focus on their individual characteristics and make heads or tails of them that way, rather than saying "he's black therefore he probably has to deal with this and that and he's disadvantaged in society and I'm sure he's experienced discrimination before and I could understand if he's angry about the state of the black community and how the government treats black issues". Similarly, when NKBJ has a book to write on me just because I'm white, that's no way to think.

I am quite aware that race is a factor to why certain people are unfairly targeted by police, I am not denying that. I'm not surprised that it happens though, when in America they continually show crime data by categorising offenders by race. Poverty, education levels, family circumstances, mental illnesses and so many factors but you tell everyone over and over that black people are more likely to commit crimes and people start to actively make that connection. Is it surprising that attitudes develop that stereotype young black men as criminals? Is it surprising that leads to disproportionate conviction rates and the like? Not to me.

Police brutality and similar injustices I think, already offend everyone regardless of whether it's your race being targeted or not. I am certainly not okay with police brutality no matter who it happens to, lets work through solutions as we can but honestly, I think the best solution is to stop drawing information and meaning from race, then people will not focus on race and draw unfavourable connections on the basis of race. So long as we continue to go down that road, I think there will always be racism in some form or another.


I don't really care if all or most alt-right people are racist or not, that's not the point? I don't like the alt-right, I'm not here to improve their image, only some people are being very unfavourable past the point that I think is reasonable. Anaxagoras is calling them a bunch of whiny white men, what's the point of even discussing the alt-right with him if that's where he's at?


Yeah, I don't know what you disagree with or what post you're referring to, is this a comedy routine?


My observation regarding ethnicity is factually wrong because of what resistances? Who wasn't given much of a choice? Are you talking about ethnic histories again? Listen, that's got nothing to do with modern-day Americans with black skin, they chose to be born where they're born as much as someone with white skin did. You're still going on about ethnic histories while telling me you're not guilty of contextualising people by their ethnic histories.

You want racism to disappear while maintaining a racially motivated outlook but it goes against common sense. A lot of what you're saying literally only makes sense when looking at it from a racialised lens, when you treat poor black people as just poor people and black victims of police brutality as just victims of police brutality, things change dramatically, it can't be avoided. The problems of the race become the problems of the people. — Judaka

From the point of view of the law, I mostly agree. But the law is permeated by discretion - who gets arrested, who gets prosecuted, who gets convicted, how long sentences are. Wherever there is discretion, people's racial attitudes will contaminate the process. Here's what the NAACP says "African Americans represent 12.5% of illicit drug users, but 29% of those arrested for drug offenses and 33% of those incarcerated in state facilities for drug offenses." 12.5% is about the percentage of blacks in the overall US population. There is a general principle here - wherever there is discretion built into any system, less popular racial, ethnic, religious, etc. groups will end up getting the short end of the stick. How do you address that?

If you are an individualist, does that mean you are a libertarian? Do you agree that decriminalization of drug use would be a good approach?

What are your thoughts on the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. The Civil Rights Act? The Voting Rights Act? Do you think it should be legal for a restaurant to refuse service to black people or hispanics? Separate but equal schools?

Do you think that racialized action in the past was justified but is not now because things have changed?

It's not as if I am ignorant of race or ethnicity, I have just worked through what it means for that person to be that race until I had nothing of note to say. I want to focus on their individual characteristics and make heads or tails of them that way, rather than saying "he's black therefore he probably has to deal with this and that and he's disadvantaged in society and I'm sure he's experienced discrimination before and I could understand if he's angry about the state of the black community and how the government treats black issues". Similarly, when NKBJ has a book to write on me just because I'm white, that's no way to think.

I am quite aware that race is a factor to why certain people are unfairly targeted by police, I am not denying that. I'm not surprised that it happens though, when in America they continually show crime data by categorising offenders by race. Poverty, education levels, family circumstances, mental illnesses and so many factors but you tell everyone over and over that black people are more likely to commit crimes and people start to actively make that connection. Is it surprising that attitudes develop that stereotype young black men as criminals? Is it surprising that leads to disproportionate conviction rates and the like? Not to me.

Police brutality and similar injustices I think, already offend everyone regardless of whether it's your race being targeted or not. I am certainly not okay with police brutality no matter who it happens to, lets work through solutions as we can but honestly, I think the best solution is to stop drawing information and meaning from race, then people will not focus on race and draw unfavourable connections on the basis of race. So long as we continue to go down that road, I think there will always be racism — Judaka

Thoughtful response. I think you would have gotten more traction with this thread if at first you had denounced the darker inclinations of the alt-right.

Listen, that's got nothing to do with modern-day Americans with black skin, they chose to be born where they're born as much as someone with white skin did. — Judaka

Chose to be born?

I am not "contextualizing" people. The views I am referring to are not an attempt to explain what is possible or give a last word on how different people see themselves. You made the claim that " the only ethnicity by and large that tries to ignore their ethnicity are Anglo-Saxon whites." I argue that the claim is incorrect in a variety of different ways. I have to bring up ethnic history if your going to make a claim about that history.

As for the idea that these histories have nothing to do with modern-day Americans, all I can suggest is spending more time here.

Well, they are kind of whining about nothing aren’t they? Those that aren’t part of the “alt-right” and wish to preserve certain traditions are occasionally being labelled “alt-right” when they’re merely voicing some concerns over the movement of peoples. This is nothing more than the usual political nonsense thrown around to slander the opposition this way or that.

I think Anaxagoras is viewing this whole “alt-right” thing as purely from a US perspective? I could be wrong.

How would you rate the West in how racist and unfair of a society is relative to the rest of the world?


There isn't an example of racism or racial prejudice you can give where you condemn it and I don't. If you can spot it, we condemn it together, your views are not tougher on these issues than mine, we seem equally strongly opposed to unfair treatment of individuals based on their ethnicity. It might be fair to say that I extend my views to protect white people while with you, I am not convinced that you would, you can confirm or deny that.

If you find a successful way to address the problem, I'm going to support it. I'm trying to point out that my views don't leave me weak on these issues, they aren't making me more tolerant of racism than you are. So maybe neither of us know how to fix the problem but you're not closer to the answers than me just because you've got an interpretative focus on race.

I don't know if I am a libertarian or not, I think different tools are better for different problems. I do support the decriminalisation of drugs, Portugal has a good system on this.

I am a great fan of Martin Luther King, I think he was going for the same thing I'm going for. I don't like any kind of racial prejudice because I believe it falls under the greater fault of using insufficient information to make judgements about people. You know someone's race and now you have strong feelings towards that person but you actually know nothing about that person, I think it's ridiculous.


Yes, they clearly didn't choose to be born in America, you can't choose to be born. So why talk about black Americans as if they were stripped of everything they owned and forced here? They were born here! Obama was the American president, he was the leader of the Western world but he's not a westerner? He's just an African descendant who was forced to be here by white slavers? You can't be serious.

Also, clearly Anglo-Saxon whites didn't always try to exclude race from their understanding of people, they used to be extremely racist, you can't seriously think I'm talking about 1960's or before right? It's a recent thing that by and large, Anglo-Saxon whites have to be sensitive about it because they're absolutely lambasted for any kind of racist remarks or perspectives. Well, I'm not trying to say it's something like 90%+, I'm just saying it's a majority and honestly, it's not something that matters to me either way and my experience is obviously biased and anecdotal.


They're kind of whining about nothing? To go back to the OP, do you think the alt-right is alone in the world? In Asia, Africa, the middle east, Eastern Europe and so on, the MAINSTREAM cultures there don't resemble the alt-right way of thinking at all? When I listen to some people talk about black issues in America, they sound like the alt-right to me, they're so racially motivated and they really feel like it's an us vs the world situation. You disagree with it?


You think so? This is already my second most commented on discussion by far and who knows, maybe it'll be the most commented on given time. I haven't really felt that many people have thought I am defending the alt-right, mostly people are just annoyed that I'm not accepting their leftist narratives.

You think so? This is already my second most commented on discussion by far and who knows, maybe it'll be the most commented on given time. I haven't really felt that many people have thought I am defending the alt-right, mostly people are just annoyed that I'm not accepting their leftist narratives. — Judaka

I just meant that you might have won more people over if you believed the alt-right had malevolent tendencies. You don’t deny they do, do you?

It's philosophy, I always come in expecting to convince absolutely nobody. It's really hard to get reliable information about what the alt-right is and what they're not. I've come across content that claims to be from the alt-right and it's absolutely atrocious, like "what the hell are these people smoking?". I don't know if they're bad apples or the bunch though right? I'm trying to draw parallels between the alt-right and other groups which are not criticised for the same type of behaviour and attitudes. If we view the alt-right as neo-nazi white supremacist nut jobs then this entire thread is pretty much debunked or at least, I should have chosen an entirely different way to go about it. I clearly didn't think that when I made that thread and so there was no way I was going to express views that that's what they were like as some people have asserted.

I mostly made the thread because I watched a video from a more reasonable youtuber who calls himself an alt-right speaker named millennial woes and got a lot of my information about the alt-right from him. Others who got their information from neo-nazi protests or the left-wing media are not going to have the same views but that's unavoidable, what can I do?

I am always wary when I hear the term “white culture”, for example. Sometimes an appeal to the preservation of “Western civilization” is a dog whistle to the white nationalists/supremacists.

How would you rate the West in how racist and unfair of a society is relative to the rest of the world? — Judaka

I've lived in less racist places, but I have no idea about the rest of the world apart from that.

I believe hate crimes are higher here than most other places, but we do have larger minority populations than, say, Japan, so that may not be a fair comparison.

But how is that relevant?

I cannot say I understand your response to some suggestions I made about Anaxagoras’ position. I thought I was clear enough when I said that some people are certainly being labelled as “alt-right” who don’t hold any kind of ethnically tilted prejudice. That was all I really said.

As for whether I agree? I see a lot of batshit crazy people saying a lot of batshit crazy things all the time on the internet. I don’t tend to pay too much attention to the fringe views. Tensions in the US are much more pronounced than in Europe though according to someone I knwo who visits a lot. US culture appears to be a rather different thing to anything I’ve found in Europeans, Australians or Canadians. Culturally it is quite set apart from my perspective - that is not to say everyone from any particular country has a certain attitude, but there are some observabke differences due to obvious items sich as history and geography.

Similarly, when NKBJ has a book to write on me just because I'm white, that's no way to think. — Judaka

When did I ever make claims about you personally solely on the basis of your skin color? LOL

What I am saying is that there are a lot of similarities between the east Asian countries trying to maintain ethnic hegemony and what the alt-right want, similarities between the alt-right wanting whites to be prioritised in "white" countries over non-whites in the same way that governments across the world prioritise their majority races. — Judaka

In the OP you were saying more than that. You were implying that people criticise behaviour in the alt-right that they do not criticise when it is displayed by non-whites. Yet the examples of racism by non-whites that you have supplied are heavily criticised. If the double standard that you imply were real, the Burmese genocide of the Rohingya would go uncriticised. Yet the criticism from Western countries has been vociferous, even to the extent of condemning a former winner of the Nobel Peace Prize.

If you have reduced your claim to an observation that racism occurs in all countries, and from people of all skin tones, then that is uncontroversial. I doubt many, if any, would care to argue. It is the claim in the OP that racism is only criticised when it is done by white people that is unsupportable.